labourlist--2020-02-16--Hustings narrowed down to three candidates – but is anyone watching?

The field of Labour leadership candidates has been narrowed to three , after Emily Thornberry on Friday failed to reach the threshold of required nominations as she fell short by just two local parties .
Her departure will not have a significant effect on the race in terms of her votes transferring to those still in the running , because according to polling – and indeed the nominations – she didn ’ t have very many supporters .
But she was making an impact on leadership hustings , bringing humour , personality and a willingness to confront rivals .
Who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ having “ zoned out ” on the BBC ’ s Victoria Derbyshire ?
Or when , in response to Rebecca Long-Bailey ’ s claim to have spoken up about antisemitism in the shadow cabinet , she said “ sorry , I don ’ t remember ” with a hugely mischievous smile ?
At the London hustings hosted by the Co-operative Party today , Long-Bailey became the leadership hopeful most prepared to stand out from the trio by casting doubt on the other candidacies .
She did so without Thornberry ’ s blunt style @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In the closing arguments , the Salford MP laid out her pitch : she would not “ retreat to centre ground ” , nor “ look and sound like the establishment ” .
She was criticising the others , particularly frontrunner Keir Starmer , by implication .
Starmer took an entirely different approach .
This week , he has started to praise his competitors .
During the Jewish Labour Movement hustings , he made a point of commending Thornberry for being outspoken on antisemitism in shadow cabinet meetings .
This afternoon , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Starmer paid tribute to Corbyn for boosting membership numbers , acknowledged the work of John McDonnell on regional investment banks , and congratulated Long-Bailey on co-authoring a “ very , very good ” report on alternative models of ownership .
At the end , Starmer talked about how all of the candidates had offered “ positive engagement ” today .
While Long-Bailey ’ s implicit criticisms of him are thought to have merit on the Labour left , and she is arguably identifying key weaknesses that could become very important over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comes across as generous – and , of course , gives the impression that he has already won the contest .
Lisa Nandy is still the most technically skilled debater in these hustings .
She offers answers with a particular rhythm and tonal pattern that allow them to stand out .
She makes her point clearly , with confidence , and usually provides an interesting example .
The Wigan MP often cheekily flips the question on its head or initially gives an unexpected answer that actually turns out not to be unexpected at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been given a little prod that enlivens proceedings .
It ’ s very clever .
The pressing question we might ask now : is anyone watching ?
None of the candidates tweeted a ‘ come and watch the hustings ’ message with a link , as you might expect .
The UK Labour Party put out a tweet , though it said the hustings started at “ 11.30 pm ” .
During the event , the party had the livestream as ‘ unlisted ’ on its YouTube account .
That means you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ party website to watch .
It ’ s no surprise that just 190 people were doing so .
That makes around 700 , if you add online viewers to a generous approximation of audience members in the room .
A total of 0.1 % of Labour members – and they aren ’ t even the only eligible voters in this contest .

The field of Labour leadership candidates has been narrowed to three, after Emily Thornberry on Friday failed to reach the threshold of required nominations as she fell short by just two local parties. Her departure will not have a significant effect on the race in terms of her votes transferring to those still in the running, because according to polling – and indeed the nominations – she didn’t have very many supporters.
But she was making an impact on leadership hustings, bringing humour, personality and a willingness to confront rivals. Who can forget the moment she admitted to having “zoned out” on the BBC’s Victoria Derbyshire? Or when, in response to Rebecca Long-Bailey’s claim to have spoken up about antisemitism in the shadow cabinet, she said “sorry, I don’t remember” with a hugely mischievous smile?
At the London hustings hosted by the Co-operative Party today, Long-Bailey became the leadership hopeful most prepared to stand out from the trio by casting doubt on the other candidacies. She did so without Thornberry’s blunt style, but nonetheless got her message across. In the closing arguments, the Salford MP laid out her pitch: she would not “retreat to centre ground”, nor “look and sound like the establishment”. She was criticising the others, particularly frontrunner Keir Starmer, by implication.
Starmer took an entirely different approach. This week, he has started to praise his competitors. During the Jewish Labour Movement hustings, he made a point of commending Thornberry for being outspoken on antisemitism in shadow cabinet meetings. This afternoon, he attacked nobody – tacitly or otherwise. Starmer paid tribute to Corbyn for boosting membership numbers, acknowledged the work of John McDonnell on regional investment banks, and congratulated Long-Bailey on co-authoring a “very, very good” report on alternative models of ownership.
At the end, Starmer talked about how all of the candidates had offered “positive engagement” today. While Long-Bailey’s implicit criticisms of him are thought to have merit on the Labour left, and she is arguably identifying key weaknesses that could become very important over the next four years, the Starmer method comes across as generous – and, of course, gives the impression that he has already won the contest.
Lisa Nandy is still the most technically skilled debater in these hustings. She offers answers with a particular rhythm and tonal pattern that allow them to stand out. She makes her point clearly, with confidence, and usually provides an interesting example. The Wigan MP often cheekily flips the question on its head or initially gives an unexpected answer that actually turns out not to be unexpected at all. But by then her audience has been given a little prod that enlivens proceedings. It’s very clever.
The pressing question we might ask now: is anyone watching? None of the candidates tweeted a ‘come and watch the hustings’ message with a link, as you might expect. The UK Labour Party put out a tweet, though it said the hustings started at “11.30 pm”. During the event, the party had the livestream as ‘unlisted’ on its YouTube account. That means you would have to specifically go through the party website to watch. It’s no surprise that just 190 people were doing so. That makes around 700, if you add online viewers to a generous approximation of audience members in the room. A total of 0.1% of Labour members – and they aren’t even the only eligible voters in this contest.


labourlist--2020-02-16--Sunday shows: Long-Bailey and Starmer disagree on 2019 Brexit policy

Angela Rayner rejected Richard Burgon ’ s idea of balloting members on military action , and declined to agree with extending free movement .
• On why she didn ’ t run for leader : “ I thought how best can I help Labour get into power ?
I thought my organising skills were there for me to be bombastic , be that John Prescott type figure… and that ’ s why I went for deputy.
” • On John McDonnell backing Richard Burgon over her and party unity : “ I think what we ’ ve got to do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can ’ t just fragment… I think there has been a factionalism .
There ’ s been a culture in the Labour Party where people have felt that they ’ ve not been welcomed.
” • On her history of backing Tony Blair on some issues : “ We know from the figures I published today that the government cut Sure Start by one third , and that ’ s really devastating because our country is about a country of aspiration .
The working class of this country want to see their children @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should be more positive about the Blair and Brown years : “ Any Labour government is better than the Conservative one… We ’ ve got to be there working , not trashing our past , but actually working together.
” • On Burgon ’ s idea of balloting members on military action : “ I think it ’ s practically impossible , but I do understand the ethos of what Richard was trying to say… But I don ’ t think it ’ s practical.
” • On immigration : “ I think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fair system .
I think freedom of movement as it currently stands as we leave the EU will end and we ’ ve got to have a fair system.
” • On whether FoM should be extended : “ I think that we should be celebrating people coming to this country and working hard .
I think there ’ s a misconception that our country is awash with people coming here , getting free benefits , getting social housing .
It ’ s just not true.
” • Pressed on whether FoM should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fight for a fair immigration system .
• To want some kind of immigration controls doesn ’ t make you racist ?
“ No , it doesn ’ t. ” • On education policy : “ The system now is rigged .
You can see that by Boris Johnson becoming Prime Minister.
” • On backing Rebecca Long-Bailey : “ Rebecca Long-Bailey , I think , is the best candidate for leader .
It ’ s about time we had a woman leader of the Labour Party .
She ’ s no ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ criticised Labour ’ s 2019 election Brexit position , suggested the four-day week policy should not have been included in the manifesto , and said it would be “ absolutely disastrous ” for Labour to campaign to rejoin the EU .
She also said there was “ no conflict ” between trans rights and women ’ s rights , but declined to describe Woman ’ s Place UK as a hate group .
• On being labelled ‘ continuity Corbyn ’ : “ I ’ m very much my own person .
To @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any other individual is quite disrespectful .
Not least because I ’ m a woman.
” • On the election : “ We got things wrong .
Our message on Brexit… We lost trust on a whole range of other issues .
Antisemitism .
Divisions in the party .
And in terms of the manifesto itself , despite having some great policies , we didn ’ t have a message that drew them altogether around aspiration… And often the campaign was quite chaotic.
” • On the manifesto : “ For example , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never going to be delivered in five years .
That was a long-term aspiration… Differentiating between what is in a manifesto in the short term , and what ’ s part of our longer-term programme , I think is very important.
” • On whether she takes responsibility for the defeat : “ I do , and certainly I feel upset that we didn ’ t sell many of the policies in the way that I would have hoped.
” • On spending more than £98bn extra a year : “ It was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – public spend , and it ’ s important to differentiate that from capital investment.
” • Do you stick by that ?
“ I do , because we weren ’ t being radical in terms of our public spending plans .
In fact , we were way behind other leading industrial nations on this.
” • On campaigning to rejoin the EU : “ It would be absolutely disastrous to go into the next general election advocating a position of rejoining the EU .
We ’ ve seen the damage that our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Our role now is to , over the next four years , set out a positive vision for the country of what GB looks like outside of the EU .
We can ’ t retreat to a position where we ’ re waiting for four years to tell our voters they got it wrong.
” • On extending FoM : “ My own personal is I am in favour of free movement , but we ’ ve got to be pragmatic and realise the position we ’ re in.
” • On trans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have legitimate and comradely debate in the party , and I ’ d encourage that… We ’ ve got to recognise the amount of transphobic hate there is out there.
” • On whether Woman ’ s Place UK is a hate group : “ I ’ m not regarding any particular group as a hate group , but what I would say is that there ’ s no place in the Labour Party for transphobic behaviour.
” • On the wider debate : “ There ’ s no conflict between the rights @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and trans rights.
” • On the IHRA definition and a statement made by Corbyn at an NEC meeting : “ I don ’ t recall that statement being made .
[ But ] I do not think it ’ s right to call Israel or the creation of Israel as a racist endeavour .
I think that ’ s antisemitic.
” Keir Starmer defended Labour ’ s Brexit policy going into the 2019 general election , saying it was “ of course ” the “ right ” stance .
He also talked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ independence .
• On his local party nominations : “ T he theme running through this for me is unity .
If we can ’ t unite our party and stop taking lumps out of each other , then we ’ re not going to win the next general election.
” • Asked whether he is on left or right of Labour : “ What I want is what matters , and what I want is fundamental change in this country .
I see ingrained inequality , and only radical changes will do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want a fundamental shift of power , of wealth and opportunity.
” • Asked whether Corbyn would be in his shadow cabinet : “ These questions about who will be in the Shadow Cabinet – I ’ m focused on winning this race and I am not going to be presumptuous about what might happen afterwards… I just want to stay disciplined and professional about what needs to happen next.
” • On who should pay top rate of income tax : “ I think it should be the top 5 % … @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tax needs to go back to where it was under the last Labour government.
” • On whether immigration should be reduced : “ I don ’ t believe in numbers and I don ’ t believe in salary gaps .
We ’ ve been playing the numbers game for the best part of ten years and it doesn ’ t work .
I want people to be able to work in Europe , people in Europe to be able to work here.
” • Asked whether he takes responsibility for Labour ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think we all take responsibility for that devastating election loss , of course we do , because for millions of people who desperately needed change , we put them in a position where they won ’ t have that change.
” Added : “ Whatever else you can challenge me on , Brexit wasn ’ t the cause of four election losses for the Labour Party so an honest assessment of the nature of the task ahead is needed.
” • On the second referendum policy : “ I thought it was the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have gone on by the way and said which side we would be campaigning on if there was a referendum and I warned our party that if we looked indecisive , we wouldn ’ t look like we were leading on this issue.
” • Do you still think it was the right policy ?
“ Yes , of course.
” • On antisemitism… Apart form respond to interview questions , what did you do ?
“ The first thing was I was making those arguments publicly , the second thing was I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cabinet.
” • Do you think that Jeremy Corbyn had a blind spot on it ?
“ I think Jeremy should have been stronger , we should have been quicker on it , but I don ’ t want to point the finger at one individual .
We failed on this.
” • Could you ever support a second independence referendum in Scotland ?
“ I don ’ t support Scotland leaving the UK.
” Added : “ I ’ ve made a different case which is for federalism , a radical federalism @ @ @ @ @ @ @ believe in , so any manifesto under my leadership would be putting that forward .
But I ’ ll say this , just to finish that answer , that whatever position in the end the Labour party takes , it has to be done in agreement with Scottish Labour.
” • Have you ever considered passing the mic so Labour can have a female leader ?
“ I have talked to the other candidates about this because it comes up , as you can imagine , and I ’ ve said that nobody @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re a man or because they are women , and the other candidates agree with me.
” Richard Burgon attributed Labour ’ s defeat to Brexit , and said every 2019 manifesto policy should be kept unless Labour members disagree .
• On the reasons for Labour ’ s defeat : “ I think the main reason was that it ended up becoming the Brexit election that Boris Johnson wanted , and in many parts of the country the issue of Brexit ended up overshadowing traditional party loyalties.
” • On Labour ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disagree with [ Keir ] on his analysis in relation to Brexit… I think it was right that we tried to bring the country together but it failed and we ’ ve got to be honest about that .
That policy failed and any idea that by being clearly Remain , which I think Keir suggested in his interview , I think he ’ s mistaken as well and it would have been even worse if we had tried that.
” • On the view that the manifesto wasn ’ t credible : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accept that .
I ’ m proud of the manifesto that we stood on.
” • Every single policy in the last manifesto should be kept ?
“ Unless the members want to ditch those policies , yes.
” • On his ‘ peace pledge ’ to ballot members on military action : “ The policy has been misrepresented .
Firstly , the policy of the peace pledge is that members would have their say if the United Nations aren ’ t backing the action and if it is not the case that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So if it is UN backed , if it a genuine national emergency , it wouldn ’ t apply and we ’ re not seeking to change the British constitution .
The Prime Minister ’ s prerogative powers will still apply .
And if MPs still really want to vote for war , because they think it ’ s the best thing to do or if that ’ s what they do , then we can ’ t stop them.
” • Most of the time when military action is considered , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t it ?
“ Iraq wasn ’ t a national emergency , our intervention in Libya wasn ’ t a national emergency , our intervention in Afghanistan wasn ’ t a national emergency.
” • On whether leadership candidates should consider giving Corbyn a shadow cabinet role : “ I think if they become leader , they should consider all the options… The point I was making in the interview is that it ’ s not the end for Jeremy Corbyn , he ’ s got a long political career ahead of him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he disagrees with in the Board of Deputies pledges : “ In relation to the eighth pledge , that does concern me because it talks about fringe Jewish groups and I want to work with groups right across the Jewish community , not just the Board of Deputies… Also , the outsourcing of the disciplinary process – we need more detail on that , I ’ m yet to be aware of any organisation that successfully outsource their disciplinary process.
” • Who did more for working class people , Jeremy Corbyn or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s not about individuals , the whole Labour movement delivered.
” • Have you ever kissed a Tory ?
“ Not that I ’ m aware of .
”

The Andrew Marr Show
Angela Rayner rejected Richard Burgon’s idea of balloting members on military action, and declined to agree with extending free movement.
On why she didn’t run for leader: “I thought how best can I help Labour get into power? I thought my organising skills were there for me to be bombastic, be that John Prescott type figure… and that’s why I went for deputy.”
On John McDonnell backing Richard Burgon over her and party unity: “I think what we’ve got to do is broaden our base, so we can’t just fragment… I think there has been a factionalism. There’s been a culture in the Labour Party where people have felt that they’ve not been welcomed.”
On her history of backing Tony Blair on some issues: “We know from the figures I published today that the government cut Sure Start by one third, and that’s really devastating because our country is about a country of aspiration. The working class of this country want to see their children do well.”
On whether Labour should be more positive about the Blair and Brown years: “Any Labour government is better than the Conservative one… We’ve got to be there working, not trashing our past, but actually working together.”
On Burgon’s idea of balloting members on military action: “I think it’s practically impossible, but I do understand the ethos of what Richard was trying to say… But I don’t think it’s practical.”
On immigration: “I think we’ve got to have a fair system. I think freedom of movement as it currently stands as we leave the EU will end and we’ve got to have a fair system.”
On whether FoM should be extended: “I think that we should be celebrating people coming to this country and working hard. I think there’s a misconception that our country is awash with people coming here, getting free benefits, getting social housing. It’s just not true.”
Pressed on whether FoM should be extended, she said she would fight for a fair immigration system.
To want some kind of immigration controls doesn’t make you racist? “No, it doesn’t.”
On education policy: “The system now is rigged. You can see that by Boris Johnson becoming Prime Minister.”
On backing Rebecca Long-Bailey: “Rebecca Long-Bailey, I think, is the best candidate for leader. It’s about time we had a woman leader of the Labour Party. She’s no ‘continuation Corbyn’.”
“I think there has been a factionalism” Shadow Education Secretary Angela Rayner says Labour must now “broaden our base” to help the party get back into government https://t.co/BB0aKke5uW #marr pic.twitter.com/nspLCt8XP2 — BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) February 16, 2020
Rebecca Long-Bailey criticised Labour’s 2019 election Brexit position, suggested the four-day week policy should not have been included in the manifesto, and said it would be “absolutely disastrous” for Labour to campaign to rejoin the EU. She also said there was “no conflict” between trans rights and women’s rights, but declined to describe Woman’s Place UK as a hate group.
On being labelled ‘continuity Corbyn’: “I’m very much my own person. To suggest I’m a continuation of any other individual is quite disrespectful. Not least because I’m a woman.”
On the election: “We got things wrong. Our message on Brexit… We lost trust on a whole range of other issues. Antisemitism. Divisions in the party. And in terms of the manifesto itself, despite having some great policies, we didn’t have a message that drew them altogether around aspiration… And often the campaign was quite chaotic.”
On the manifesto: “For example, the four-day working week. That was never going to be delivered in five years. That was a long-term aspiration… Differentiating between what is in a manifesto in the short term, and what’s part of our longer-term programme, I think is very important.”
On whether she takes responsibility for the defeat: “I do, and certainly I feel upset that we didn’t sell many of the policies in the way that I would have hoped.”
On spending more than £98bn extra a year: “It was £82.9bn that we were planning to spend – public spend, and it’s important to differentiate that from capital investment.”
Do you stick by that? “I do, because we weren’t being radical in terms of our public spending plans. In fact, we were way behind other leading industrial nations on this.”
On campaigning to rejoin the EU: “It would be absolutely disastrous to go into the next general election advocating a position of rejoining the EU. We’ve seen the damage that our compromise position did in this election campaign… Our role now is to, over the next four years, set out a positive vision for the country of what GB looks like outside of the EU. We can’t retreat to a position where we’re waiting for four years to tell our voters they got it wrong.”
On extending FoM: “My own personal is I am in favour of free movement, but we’ve got to be pragmatic and realise the position we’re in.”
On trans rights pledges: “We can all have legitimate and comradely debate in the party, and I’d encourage that… We’ve got to recognise the amount of transphobic hate there is out there.”
On whether Woman’s Place UK is a hate group: “I’m not regarding any particular group as a hate group, but what I would say is that there’s no place in the Labour Party for transphobic behaviour.”
On the wider debate: “There’s no conflict between the rights of women and safety in particular places and trans rights.”
On the IHRA definition and a statement made by Corbyn at an NEC meeting: “I don’t recall that statement being made. [But] I do not think it’s right to call Israel or the creation of Israel as a racist endeavour. I think that’s antisemitic.”
“I want the right to self ID and I want that enshrined in law”#Marr asks if Labour leadership candidate Rebecca Long-Bailey will reform the 2010 Equality Act which upholds the right to single sex spaceshttps://t.co/98s1CEmj0Y pic.twitter.com/wEHVElNX73 — BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) February 16, 2020
Ridge on Sunday
Keir Starmer defended Labour’s Brexit policy going into the 2019 general election, saying it was “of course” the “right” stance. He also talked about uniting Labour, immigration and Scottish independence.
On his local party nominations: “T he theme running through this for me is unity. If we can’t unite our party and stop taking lumps out of each other, then we’re not going to win the next general election.”
Asked whether he is on left or right of Labour: “ What I want is what matters, and what I want is fundamental change in this country. I see ingrained inequality, and only radical changes will do anything about it, so I do want a fundamental shift of power, of wealth and opportunity.”
Asked whether Corbyn would be in his shadow cabinet: “These questions about who will be in the Shadow Cabinet – I’m focused on winning this race and I am not going to be presumptuous about what might happen afterwards… I just want to stay disciplined and professional about what needs to happen next.”
On who should pay top rate of income tax: “I think it should be the top 5%… I’ve also said that corporation tax needs to go back to where it was under the last Labour government.”
On whether immigration should be reduced: “I don’t believe in numbers and I don’t believe in salary gaps. We’ve been playing the numbers game for the best part of ten years and it doesn’t work. I want people to be able to work in Europe, people in Europe to be able to work here.”
Asked whether he takes responsibility for Labour’s 2019 Brexit position: “I think we all take responsibility for that devastating election loss, of course we do, because for millions of people who desperately needed change, we put them in a position where they won’t have that change.” Added: “Whatever else you can challenge me on, Brexit wasn’t the cause of four election losses for the Labour Party so an honest assessment of the nature of the task ahead is needed.”
On the second referendum policy: “I thought it was the right policy, I thought we should have gone on by the way and said which side we would be campaigning on if there was a referendum and I warned our party that if we looked indecisive, we wouldn’t look like we were leading on this issue.”
Do you still think it was the right policy? “Yes, of course.”
On antisemitism… Apart form respond to interview questions, what did you do? “The first thing was I was making those arguments publicly, the second thing was I was making those points in the shadow cabinet.”
Do you think that Jeremy Corbyn had a blind spot on it? “I think Jeremy should have been stronger, we should have been quicker on it, but I don’t want to point the finger at one individual. We failed on this.”
Could you ever support a second independence referendum in Scotland? “I don’t support Scotland leaving the UK.” Added: “I’ve made a different case which is for federalism, a radical federalism, and that’s what I believe in, so any manifesto under my leadership would be putting that forward. But I’ll say this, just to finish that answer, that whatever position in the end the Labour party takes, it has to be done in agreement with Scottish Labour.”
Have you ever considered passing the mic so Labour can have a female leader? “I have talked to the other candidates about this because it comes up, as you can imagine, and I’ve said that nobody in this is standing because they’re a man or because they are women, and the other candidates agree with me.”
“I am not going to get drawn into questions that are really for the next manifesto”@Keir_Starmer declines to give specific details of the level at which he believes people should start paying the top rate of income tax Follow #Ridge live here: https://t.co/XZqrLOHSy4 pic.twitter.com/ZAxd5TvqEz — Sophy Ridge on Sunday (@RidgeOnSunday) February 16, 2020
Richard Burgon attributed Labour’s defeat to Brexit, and said every 2019 manifesto policy should be kept unless Labour members disagree.
On the reasons for Labour’s defeat: “I think the main reason was that it ended up becoming the Brexit election that Boris Johnson wanted, and in many parts of the country the issue of Brexit ended up overshadowing traditional party loyalties.”
On Labour’s Brexit position: “I respectfully disagree with [Keir] on his analysis in relation to Brexit… I think it was right that we tried to bring the country together but it failed and we’ve got to be honest about that. That policy failed and any idea that by being clearly Remain, which I think Keir suggested in his interview, I think he’s mistaken as well and it would have been even worse if we had tried that.”
On the view that the manifesto wasn’t credible: “No, I don’t accept that. I’m proud of the manifesto that we stood on.”
Every single policy in the last manifesto should be kept? “Unless the members want to ditch those policies, yes.”
On his ‘peace pledge’ to ballot members on military action: “ The policy has been misrepresented. Firstly, the policy of the peace pledge is that members would have their say if the United Nations aren’t backing the action and if it is not the case that it’s a genuine national emergency. So if it is UN backed, if it a genuine national emergency, it wouldn’t apply and we’re not seeking to change the British constitution. The Prime Minister’s prerogative powers will still apply. And if MPs still really want to vote for war, because they think it’s the best thing to do or if that’s what they do, then we can’t stop them.”
Most of the time when military action is considered, it is a national emergency isn’t it? “Iraq wasn’t a national emergency, our intervention in Libya wasn’t a national emergency, our intervention in Afghanistan wasn’t a national emergency.”
On whether leadership candidates should consider giving Corbyn a shadow cabinet role: “I think if they become leader, they should consider all the options… The point I was making in the interview is that it’s not the end for Jeremy Corbyn, he’s got a long political career ahead of him should he wish.”
On what he disagrees with in the Board of Deputies pledges: “In relation to the eighth pledge, that does concern me because it talks about fringe Jewish groups and I want to work with groups right across the Jewish community, not just the Board of Deputies… Also, the outsourcing of the disciplinary process – we need more detail on that, I’m yet to be aware of any organisation that successfully outsource their disciplinary process.”
Best Labour leader? “Keir Hardie”
Who did more for working class people, Jeremy Corbyn or Tony Blair? “I think it’s not about individuals, the whole Labour movement delivered.”
Dream shadow cabinet job? “Shadow Foreign Secretary.”
Favourite band? “Iron Maiden.”
Have you ever kissed a Tory? “Not that I’m aware of.”


labourlist--2020-02-15--We must not turn our back on BAME communities to gain votes elsewhere

The 2019 general election was a rude wake up call for the Labour Party .
Despite a progressive manifesto , it was a defeat of epic proportions .
Of course , this has led to a series of op-eds and ‘ expert ’ pieces about what Labour needs to do to rebuild its base in the so-called ‘ heartlands ’ .
As a BAME member of the party , I have been quite shocked at some of the ways in which the narrative has been framed as a fight between traditional white , working-class Labour voters and the party ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We must remember that Labour ’ s heartlands are not just Bolsover and Bury , but also places like Newham , Hackney and Tower Hamlets .
In fact , an Opinium poll just before the election showed that Labour was 25 points ahead of the Tories amongst BAME voters .
It would be a colossal mistake for Labour to turn back on this support .
BAME people within Labour have often complained about feeling underrepresented within the party structure – one only needs to look at the struggle Dawn Butler and Rosena Allin-Khan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even reach the membership ballot stage .
We should also be mindful of the fact that the BAME umbrella is far from homogenous .
In recent years , we have seen that black solidarity , which was the foundation of the anti-racist/anti-fascist movement , being eroded with communities pitted against each other .
What we seem to be missing is the politics of solidarity and intersectionality .
The 1980s and its horrible racist violence also brought together youths of African , Caribbean and Asian origin under a common banner to fight the forces @ @ @ @ @ @ @ understand Labour ’ s loss , people have been conflating the entire working class with a marginal segment who did vote for the Tories against their own interests but such a false narrative leads to greater division .
Though we might have been told differently , there is actually more in common between white and BAME working class than people would like us to believe .
At the same time , it is important to acknowledge that some sections of the BAME community have indeed abandoned us , notably Indian and Jewish communities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reflecting their interests .
The current complaints process in the party is slow – unable to resolve the antisemitism , homophobia and racism that Labour members have faced – and has left many feeling unsupported .
As a person of Indian origin , I should point out that Labour has always been the natural home for Indians .
The first Labour MP of Indian origin , Shapurji Saklatvala , was famously arrested in 1926 for a speech he made in support of striking miners and jailed for sedition .
Radicalism and socialism is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ struggle , and indeed the state of India , was formed .
Whilst issues such as Kashmir did indeed play a role in pushing many Indians away , it would be wrong to say this was the only reason for Indians moving away from the party .
Many Indians were rightly concerned at their lack of representation on party committees and among candidates .
And whilst programs such as the Bernie Grant leadership programme are indeed welcome – we still have to acknowledge the lack of male Black MPs in Westminster .
Where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ answer is to not turn our back on the BAME community in order to try and gain votes elsewhere , but to actually continue with our radical , people-focused programme to transform society .
This also brings me to political education – one that does not just gloss over the history of the British empire , and instead critically teaches what that meant for many of us who now call Britain home .
This also means we take an uncritical approach to immigration and borders , rather than buying into the narrative of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to develop a more ambitious social integration program through our community organising and tell the story of what unites us : the shared oppression and common struggles that all working people face regardless of our ethnicity , gender or sexuality .
Injustice and structural racism permeate our political system and it is not enough to just include one BAME person on every shortlist .
Representation matters and Labour must make it a priority to include more BAME people in target seats .
As Operation Black Vote found , the BAME vote was crucial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ must accept that mistakes were made and we were not quick enough in tackling those and the only way to rebuild that trust is to go back into those communities and meaningfully engage with them and above all listen .

The 2019 general election was a rude wake up call for the Labour Party. Despite a progressive manifesto, it was a defeat of epic proportions. Of course, this has led to a series of op-eds and ‘expert’ pieces about what Labour needs to do to rebuild its base in the so-called ‘heartlands’. As a BAME member of the party, I have been quite shocked at some of the ways in which the narrative has been framed as a fight between traditional white, working-class Labour voters and the party’s multi-ethnic supporters in urban cities.
We must remember that Labour’s heartlands are not just Bolsover and Bury, but also places like Newham, Hackney and Tower Hamlets. In fact, an Opinium poll just before the election showed that Labour was 25 points ahead of the Tories amongst BAME voters. It would be a colossal mistake for Labour to turn back on this support.
BAME people within Labour have often complained about feeling underrepresented within the party structure – one only needs to look at the struggle Dawn Butler and Rosena Allin-Khan had to go through before they could even reach the membership ballot stage. We should also be mindful of the fact that the BAME umbrella is far from homogenous. In recent years, we have seen that black solidarity, which was the foundation of the anti-racist/anti-fascist movement, being eroded with communities pitted against each other.
What we seem to be missing is the politics of solidarity and intersectionality. The 1980s and its horrible racist violence also brought together youths of African, Caribbean and Asian origin under a common banner to fight the forces of racism. In our narrative to understand Labour’s loss, people have been conflating the entire working class with a marginal segment who did vote for the Tories against their own interests but such a false narrative leads to greater division. Though we might have been told differently, there is actually more in common between white and BAME working class than people would like us to believe.
At the same time, it is important to acknowledge that some sections of the BAME community have indeed abandoned us, notably Indian and Jewish communities who feel that the party is not reflecting their interests. The current complaints process in the party is slow – unable to resolve the antisemitism, homophobia and racism that Labour members have faced – and has left many feeling unsupported.
As a person of Indian origin, I should point out that Labour has always been the natural home for Indians. The first Labour MP of Indian origin, Shapurji Saklatvala, was famously arrested in 1926 for a speech he made in support of striking miners and jailed for sedition. Radicalism and socialism is the cornerstone on which the Indian independence struggle, and indeed the state of India, was formed.
Whilst issues such as Kashmir did indeed play a role in pushing many Indians away, it would be wrong to say this was the only reason for Indians moving away from the party. Many Indians were rightly concerned at their lack of representation on party committees and among candidates. And whilst programs such as the Bernie Grant leadership programme are indeed welcome – we still have to acknowledge the lack of male Black MPs in Westminster.
Where do we go from here? The answer is to not turn our back on the BAME community in order to try and gain votes elsewhere, but to actually continue with our radical, people-focused programme to transform society. This also brings me to political education – one that does not just gloss over the history of the British empire, and instead critically teaches what that meant for many of us who now call Britain home. This also means we take an uncritical approach to immigration and borders, rather than buying into the narrative of scapegoating migrants.
There is a need to develop a more ambitious social integration program through our community organising and tell the story of what unites us: the shared oppression and common struggles that all working people face regardless of our ethnicity, gender or sexuality.
Injustice and structural racism permeate our political system and it is not enough to just include one BAME person on every shortlist. Representation matters and Labour must make it a priority to include more BAME people in target seats. As Operation Black Vote found, the BAME vote was crucial in almost 100 marginals. The party must accept that mistakes were made and we were not quick enough in tackling those and the only way to rebuild that trust is to go back into those communities and meaningfully engage with them and above all listen.


labourlist--2020-02-15--Rosie Duffield: Why I’m backing Rosena Allin-Khan for deputy

Dr Rosena Allin-Khan is my friend , and I know she would make a fantastic deputy leader of the Labour Party .
You might think I ’ m only saying that because I ’ m biased – yes , she ’ s my friend , but that ’ s not why I ’ m supporting her .
I ’ m supporting her because I ’ ve seen for myself the determination , relentless hard work , and tireless campaigning energy she would bring to the job .
I was delighted to see her get the necessary support from local Labour @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over the last few weeks – despite the fact that Rosena is the underdog , she simply doesn ’ t understand the meaning of the word ‘ impossible ’ .
Rosena didn ’ t have an easy start in life .
She was brought up by her mum in a single-parent household , and they didn ’ t have much .
She failed her A-levels first time around because of problems at home and was told she ’ d never amount to anything .
But that didn ’ t stop her .
Thanks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government , she was able to go to Cambridge to study medicine aged 24 and fulfil her lifelong dream of becoming a doctor .
She still works shifts in A & E alongside her work as an MP .
That determination to never give up has influenced everything that Rosena does .
She won a local council seat that had been held by the Tories for decades , winning it by just 16 votes .
She came through a rigorous selection process to become the Labour parliamentary candidate for her home of Tooting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ three consecutive elections to hold the seat in 2016 , 2017 and 2019 .
She ’ s also supported me in elections – campaigning to help me hold my seat when it looked under threat from the Tories .
Every day in parliament , I see her fighting tirelessly for her community and the people she represents .
That she manages to do all this whilst still working shifts as a doctor in our NHS and also travelling round the world to undertake humanitarian work is a testament to her energy , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very little sleep !
Perhaps more importantly , though , she is the candidate with the best ideas in the race to become the next deputy leader of Labour .
Our party is in a parlous state of health , and we need to start listening before we can start rebuilding .
Rosena has proposed a series of detailed , innovative ideas for how we start the healing process .
She has put forward robust pledges to start dealing with the scourge of antisemitism within Labour , she has published a grassroots revival @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can improve its campaigning operation , and she truly cares about the wellbeing of councillors and activists .
I ’ ve seen her roll up her sleeves and get stuck in with campaigning – the energy she brings with her is relentless .
All of the evidence suggests that these ideas have huge amounts of support across the country , a recent poll shows that Rosena is the candidate who people see as most in-touch with voters .
They also believe Rosena is best-placed to replace the previous deputy , Tom Watson , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ start winning again .
I became an MP by winning a seat , Canterbury , that had never previously been held by Labour , so I know how important it is for the party to have a leadership team who understand what it takes to win .
Yes , Rosena is my friend , but she ’ s also the best candidate to become the next deputy leader of the Labour Party and that ’ s why she has my full support .
I hope you ’ ll support her , too , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Labour forward , together .

Dr Rosena Allin-Khan is my friend, and I know she would make a fantastic deputy leader of the Labour Party. You might think I’m only saying that because I’m biased – yes, she’s my friend, but that’s not why I’m supporting her. I’m supporting her because I’ve seen for myself the determination, relentless hard work, and tireless campaigning energy she would bring to the job.
I was delighted to see her get the necessary support from local Labour parties to make it onto the ballot over the last few weeks – despite the fact that Rosena is the underdog, she simply doesn’t understand the meaning of the word ‘impossible’.
Rosena didn’t have an easy start in life. She was brought up by her mum in a single-parent household, and they didn’t have much. She failed her A-levels first time around because of problems at home and was told she’d never amount to anything. But that didn’t stop her.
Thanks to reforms introduced by the last Labour government, she was able to go to Cambridge to study medicine aged 24 and fulfil her lifelong dream of becoming a doctor. She still works shifts in A&E alongside her work as an MP.
That determination to never give up has influenced everything that Rosena does. She won a local council seat that had been held by the Tories for decades, winning it by just 16 votes. She came through a rigorous selection process to become the Labour parliamentary candidate for her home of Tooting, and she’s since won three consecutive elections to hold the seat in 2016, 2017 and 2019. She’s also supported me in elections – campaigning to help me hold my seat when it looked under threat from the Tories.
Every day in parliament, I see her fighting tirelessly for her community and the people she represents. That she manages to do all this whilst still working shifts as a doctor in our NHS and also travelling round the world to undertake humanitarian work is a testament to her energy, as well as her ability to function on very little sleep!
Perhaps more importantly, though, she is the candidate with the best ideas in the race to become the next deputy leader of Labour. Our party is in a parlous state of health, and we need to start listening before we can start rebuilding. Rosena has proposed a series of detailed, innovative ideas for how we start the healing process.
She has put forward robust pledges to start dealing with the scourge of antisemitism within Labour, she has published a grassroots revival manifesto with detailed suggestions of how Labour can improve its campaigning operation, and she truly cares about the wellbeing of councillors and activists. I’ve seen her roll up her sleeves and get stuck in with campaigning – the energy she brings with her is relentless.
All of the evidence suggests that these ideas have huge amounts of support across the country, a recent poll shows that Rosena is the candidate who people see as most in-touch with voters. They also believe Rosena is best-placed to replace the previous deputy, Tom Watson, and as someone who can help Labour start winning again. I became an MP by winning a seat, Canterbury, that had never previously been held by Labour, so I know how important it is for the party to have a leadership team who understand what it takes to win.
Yes, Rosena is my friend, but she’s also the best candidate to become the next deputy leader of the Labour Party and that’s why she has my full support. I hope you’ll support her, too, so that we can all start taking Labour forward, together.


labourlist--2020-02-17--It’s between Starmer, Long-Bailey and Nandy. Nearly 7 weeks to go.

Emily Thornberry is out of the running , having failed to reach the nomination threshold by just two local parties , and Labour ’ s leadership election is down to three .
Party members , affiliates and supporters will have a choice of three : Keir Starmer , Rebecca Long-Bailey or Lisa Nandy .
By the close of the nominations window on Friday , Starmer had 374 CLPs and five trade unions – way ahead of Long-Bailey ( 164 CLPs and five unions ) and Nandy ( 72 CLPs and two unions ) .
Meanwhile , all five deputy leadership @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the other contest , where Angela Rayner is the clear frontrunner .
Every candidate participated in more official party hustings over the weekend , and you can read my write-up of the debate in London on Sunday here .
The key moments were Long-Bailey ’ s willingness to criticise Starmer by implication , saying she won ’ t “ look and sound like the establishment ” , while the Holborn MP made clear he was the frontrunner by praising his rivals .
But the most newsworthy comments actually appeared in the deputy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fewer people .
The subject was the BBC , in light of the government mulling over whether to scrap the licence fee and replace it with a subscription model .
Rayner described herself as “ no big fan of the BBC ” and Dawn Butler said it was “ the Tory PR machine ” during the election , while Richard Burgon simply noted that he had been “ disappointed ” by its political news output .
Ian Murray , the most Corbynsceptic candidate , stood out with a passionate defence of the public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contenders expressed an interest in preventing an overhaul such as the one being floated by Boris Johnson , they made their cases in starkly different ways .
There is another , more emotionally charged , debate being conducted within Labour at the moment .
It was sparked this time by a Laura Pidcock article for Tribune , in which she said : “ The women ’ s movement needs the space to talk about sex and gender , without fear of being ‘ no platformed ’ .
” She now chairs Burgon ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trans Rights then put out 12 pledges , which all main leadership candidates have signed apart from Starmer .
Explaining this decision , he said last week that “ we need to dial this down ” .
Over the weekend , Long-Bailey appeared to deny that she thought Woman ’ s Place UK was a “ hate group ” , as stated in the pledges .
But she also argued : “ There ’ s no conflict between the rights of women and safety in particular places and trans rights.
” At an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ confronted with specific questions over where violent sexual offenders who are trans should be placed in prisons and how their crimes should be recorded .
Her responses unambiguously stuck by the application of self-ID .
It would appear that the current views of Long-Bailey and Nandy go against Labour ’ s 2019 manifesto , which pledged to reform the Gender Recognition Act but also to end mixed-sex wards in hospitals and “ ensure that single-sex-based exemptions contained in the Equality Act 2010 are… fully enforced ” .
Though it must be said that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so , because there was a row at the time over how these pledges should be interpreted , with the Shadow Equalities Secretary having a different reading of them to key members of the ‘ Clause V ’ manifesto meeting .
Will the party have a completely clear policy on these areas come the next election ?

Emily Thornberry is out of the running, having failed to reach the nomination threshold by just two local parties, and Labour’s leadership election is down to three. Party members, affiliates and supporters will have a choice of three: Keir Starmer, Rebecca Long-Bailey or Lisa Nandy. By the close of the nominations window on Friday, Starmer had 374 CLPs and five trade unions – way ahead of Long-Bailey (164 CLPs and five unions) and Nandy (72 CLPs and two unions). Meanwhile, all five deputy leadership hopefuls secured places on the ballot paper in the other contest, where Angela Rayner is the clear frontrunner.
Every candidate participated in more official party hustings over the weekend, and you can read my write-up of the debate in London on Sunday here. The key moments were Long-Bailey’s willingness to criticise Starmer by implication, saying she won’t “look and sound like the establishment”, while the Holborn MP made clear he was the frontrunner by praising his rivals. But the most newsworthy comments actually appeared in the deputy hustings, which was watched by even fewer people.
The subject was the BBC, in light of the government mulling over whether to scrap the licence fee and replace it with a subscription model. Rayner described herself as “no big fan of the BBC” and Dawn Butler said it was “the Tory PR machine” during the election, while Richard Burgon simply noted that he had been “disappointed” by its political news output. Ian Murray, the most Corbynsceptic candidate, stood out with a passionate defence of the public service broadcaster. While each of the contenders expressed an interest in preventing an overhaul such as the one being floated by Boris Johnson, they made their cases in starkly different ways.
There is another, more emotionally charged, debate being conducted within Labour at the moment. It was sparked this time by a Laura Pidcock article for Tribune, in which she said: “The women’s movement needs the space to talk about sex and gender, without fear of being ‘no platformed’.” She now chairs Burgon’s campaign. The Labour Campaign for Trans Rights then put out 12 pledges, which all main leadership candidates have signed apart from Starmer. Explaining this decision, he said last week that “we need to dial this down”.
Over the weekend, Long-Bailey appeared to deny that she thought Woman’s Place UK was a “hate group”, as stated in the pledges. But she also argued: “There’s no conflict between the rights of women and safety in particular places and trans rights.” At an event on Sunday afternoon, Nandy was confronted with specific questions over where violent sexual offenders who are trans should be placed in prisons and how their crimes should be recorded. Her responses unambiguously stuck by the application of self-ID.
It would appear that the current views of Long-Bailey and Nandy go against Labour’s 2019 manifesto, which pledged to reform the Gender Recognition Act but also to end mixed-sex wards in hospitals and “ensure that single-sex-based exemptions contained in the Equality Act 2010 are… fully enforced”. Though it must be said that they only ‘appear’ to do so, because there was a row at the time over how these pledges should be interpreted, with the Shadow Equalities Secretary having a different reading of them to key members of the ‘Clause V’ manifesto meeting. Will the party have a completely clear policy on these areas come the next election?
Sienna @siennamarla


labourlist--2020-02-17--5 things we learnt from Channel 4’s Labour leadership debate

Keir Starmer really doesn ’ t want to criticise Jeremy Corbyn .
Asked whether they would be “ wise or try Corbynism again ” , Starmer mentioned negative comments about the leadership coming up on the doorstep .
As a result , he was specifically encouraged to outline what it was about Jeremy Corbyn that was unpopular .
But Starmer didn ’ t do that – instead , he pointed to the outgoing leader being “ vilified in the press ” , before going on to praise Corbyn for boosting the size of the party .
In a comment that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the night , which has already been clipped and tweeted from her account , she said there was “ not one policy I would drop ” from Labour ’ s 2019 manifesto – but then gave an explanation .
“ There ’ s no such thing as Corbynism , ” she said .
“ There ’ s our Labour values .
If we believe in building more council homes , investing in our futures… that ’ s socialism , that ’ s not Corbynism.
” The audience liked it , and it was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Corbyn “ 10/10 ” rating that is still haunting her leadership bid .
None of them will commit now to decriminalising cannabis .
Yes , that includes Long-Bailey , who implied earlier in the race that she had smoked pot in Amsterdam .
Although on the Labour left , Long-Bailey said she would not decriminalise cannabis , but argued there should be a “ national conversation ” about it .
Nandy said the same but mentioned a “ proper review ” , and Starmer said he would not do so “ immediately ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are no arrests nor prosecutions .
Lisa Nandy is the only candidate who would vote to scrap the monarchy .
Also during the quick-fire round , the candidates were asked about a hypothetical referendum on the monarchy – presumably inspired by the suggestion of Clive Lewis , who was knocked out of the contest during its first stage .
Nandy went first , saying she would vote to scrap it .
Starmer said he wouldn ’ t , and it was not a priority .
Long-Bailey also emphasised that there are “ more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the surprise of many members , I am certain – stated : “ I wouldn ’ t vote to abolish the monarchy ” .
There ’ s no continuity Corbyn to be found there .
Greatest Labour leader of the last 50 years ?
Neither Jeremy Corbyn nor Tony Blair , according to these three .
Recent polling by Lord Ashcroft showed that , presented with this question including a 50-year limit , Labour members go for Corbyn while ordinary voters opt for Blair .
It was notable that every one of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those answers .
Long-Bailey chose Clement Attlee , though when the ’ 50 years ’ aspect was highlighted , didn ’ t pick another .
Linking his reply to his key message in this race , Starmer picked Harold Wilson “ because he got party to unite behind him ” .
Nandy did her usual trick of turning the question on its head , cheekily answering : “ I ’ m hoping we ’ re about to elect her ” .
Then she selected “ the best that never was – Barbara Castle @ @

Keir Starmer really doesn’t want to criticise Jeremy Corbyn.
Asked whether they would be “wise or try Corbynism again”, Starmer mentioned negative comments about the leadership coming up on the doorstep. As a result, he was specifically encouraged to outline what it was about Jeremy Corbyn that was unpopular. But Starmer didn’t do that – instead, he pointed to the outgoing leader being “vilified in the press”, before going on to praise Corbyn for boosting the size of the party.
Rebecca Long-Bailey thinks Corbynism doesn’t exist.
In a comment that won Long-Bailey her main applause line of the night, which has already been clipped and tweeted from her account, she said there was “not one policy I would drop” from Labour’s 2019 manifesto – but then gave an explanation. “There’s no such thing as Corbynism,” she said. “There’s our Labour values. If we believe in building more council homes, investing in our futures… that’s socialism, that’s not Corbynism.” The audience liked it, and it was a good way to combat that tricky Corbyn “10/10” rating that is still haunting her leadership bid.
None of them will commit now to decriminalising cannabis.
Yes, that includes Long-Bailey, who implied earlier in the race that she had smoked pot in Amsterdam. Although on the Labour left, Long-Bailey said she would not decriminalise cannabis, but argued there should be a “conversation nationally” about it. Nandy said the same but mentioned a “proper review”, and Starmer said he would not do so “immediately” but has supported schemes in which there are no arrests nor prosecutions. (Video here.)
Lisa Nandy is the only candidate who would vote to scrap the monarchy.
Also during the quick-fire round, the candidates were asked about a hypothetical referendum on the monarchy – presumably inspired by the suggestion of Clive Lewis, who was knocked out of the contest during its first stage. Nandy went first, saying she would vote to scrap it. Starmer said he wouldn’t, and it was not a priority. Long-Bailey also emphasised that there are “more important things”, then – to the surprise of many members, I am certain – stated: “I wouldn’t vote to abolish the monarchy”. There’s no continuity Corbyn to be found there.
Greatest Labour leader of the last 50 years? Neither Jeremy Corbyn nor Tony Blair, according to these three.


labourlist--2020-02-17--Labour should defend Auntie Beeb as if it were the NHS

The BBC is the greatest broadcasting institution in the world .
It ’ s a rare institution that is dedicated to self-flagellation while delivering value to the public .
We are lucky to have a public broadcaster that prioritises impartiality above all else .
Compared to the United States and a media market dominated by ultra-conservative voices , or the state broadcasters of Russia and China , we have a world-class public service broadcaster with the interests of the general public at its heart .
As a party , Labour is committed to defending public services , the rights of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of citizens to be informed .
We should defend the BBC like it is the NHS – an institution that is so woven into the fabric of British society that a world without it is immeasurably poorer .
In the aftermath of a fourth successive election defeat , the Tories are preparing to hand out a punishment to the BBC , and potentially other broadcasters and news organisations like Channel 4 .
They have banned neutral outlets from press briefings and are clearly prepared to try to delegitimise any scrutiny or criticism they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aspects of the last few years has been the refusal of many on the left to mount a sustained and passionate defence of the BBC as an institution .
Instead , they prefer the easy option of blaming our woes as a party on media hostility , hounding prominent journalists to the extent that they needed bodyguards to attend our conference , and legitimising fringe voices to act as proxies for the party – proxies who would encourage the party to talk only to ourselves .
The Tories have always wanted to chip @ @ @ @ @ @ @ broadcasting – hence the ticking time bomb George Osborne gave to them when he insisted that the cost of free TV licences for over-75s would be borne by the broadcaster .
That was a move designed to make the BBC unpopular among pensioners .
It ’ s clear that the new Conservative Party , so much more in hoc to right-wing media barons and willing to move away from the centre-ground so emphatically , will have no qualms about assaulting the BBC , assaulting the licence fee or attacking the online content that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make to serve all audiences .
Why has a significant section of the Labour Party , and some of the most influential figures on the new left , taken any opportunity to attack the BBC and the wider media ?
Is it a knee-jerk reaction to being criticised ?
If liberty is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear , political parties and movements have a duty to submit themselves to inspection .
The job of the media is not simply to write down what politicians say but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the BBC , we lose any semblance of a non-commercial institution at the heart of our culture .
This is not to say that the BBC does not make mistakes .
An organisation trying to simultaneously serve audiences on different platforms , of different generations and of clashing political persuasions will drop clangers .
Were there issues with the general election coverage ?
Absolutely .
Does that mean that BBC News has ceased to be indispensable to the public and a world-leading brand ?
Absolutely not .
The proposed reforms described in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on news – they would reshape the UK TV landscape , likely clearing away world leading TV programmes and brands such as Strictly and Line of Duty .
Who benefits from the defenestration of a universal cultural asset ?
Again , the big commercial players in the UK media , as well as foreign broadcasters .
Although the government will apparently safeguard the World Service , the ‘ soft power ’ of the BBC on behalf of the UK relies on the pipeline of talent , from Phoebe Waller Bridge back to Armando @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the BBC would be to diminish that pipeline and diminish the global standing of the UK ’ s main source of soft power .
At the moment , the government appear to want to force the BBC to shed Radio 1 , Radio 2 , 5 Live and 6 Music as well as BBC Scotland , Wales , Northern Ireland and local radio stations – many of which have stayed on-air through the night this weekend in the storms and flooding caused by Storm Dennis .
The ‘ market ’ certainly would not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Who would ?
It would chip away at the services valued by many ordinary working people .
Labour needs to be passionately defending the BBC as a universal service in the interests of everyday consumers .
No media empire is going to provide the depth of local provision that the BBC does .
For all the easy answers , blaming the media for Labour ’ s loss in December and refusing to defend public service broadcasting on the basis of some Twitter conspiracy threads demeans the party and the country as a whole @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is much more commercially dominated , makes electing a Labour government much harder and damages a universal service that people across Britain rely on .
The BBC should not have to rely on Damian Green and Huw Merriman to defend it – the labour movement and the wider left should rally to the defence of Auntie Beeb .

The BBC is the greatest broadcasting institution in the world. It’s a rare institution that is dedicated to self-flagellation while delivering value to the public. We are lucky to have a public broadcaster that prioritises impartiality above all else. Compared to the United States and a media market dominated by ultra-conservative voices, or the state broadcasters of Russia and China, we have a world-class public service broadcaster with the interests of the general public at its heart.
As a party, Labour is committed to defending public services, the rights of journalists across the world and the rights of citizens to be informed. We should defend the BBC like it is the NHS – an institution that is so woven into the fabric of British society that a world without it is immeasurably poorer.
In the aftermath of a fourth successive election defeat, the Tories are preparing to hand out a punishment to the BBC, and potentially other broadcasters and news organisations like Channel 4. They have banned neutral outlets from press briefings and are clearly prepared to try to delegitimise any scrutiny or criticism they face.
One of the most depressing aspects of the last few years has been the refusal of many on the left to mount a sustained and passionate defence of the BBC as an institution. Instead, they prefer the easy option of blaming our woes as a party on media hostility, hounding prominent journalists to the extent that they needed bodyguards to attend our conference, and legitimising fringe voices to act as proxies for the party – proxies who would encourage the party to talk only to ourselves.
The Tories have always wanted to chip away at the foundations of public service broadcasting – hence the ticking time bomb George Osborne gave to them when he insisted that the cost of free TV licences for over-75s would be borne by the broadcaster. That was a move designed to make the BBC unpopular among pensioners.
It’s clear that the new Conservative Party, so much more in hoc to right-wing media barons and willing to move away from the centre-ground so emphatically, will have no qualms about assaulting the BBC, assaulting the licence fee or attacking the online content that the corporation makes – content it must make to serve all audiences.
Why has a significant section of the Labour Party, and some of the most influential figures on the new left, taken any opportunity to attack the BBC and the wider media? Is it a knee-jerk reaction to being criticised? If liberty is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear, political parties and movements have a duty to submit themselves to inspection. The job of the media is not simply to write down what politicians say but to contextualise and analyse it. Without the BBC, we lose any semblance of a non-commercial institution at the heart of our culture.
This is not to say that the BBC does not make mistakes. An organisation trying to simultaneously serve audiences on different platforms, of different generations and of clashing political persuasions will drop clangers. Were there issues with the general election coverage? Absolutely. Does that mean that BBC News has ceased to be indispensable to the public and a world-leading brand? Absolutely not.
The proposed reforms described in the Sunday Times story go beyond an assault on news – they would reshape the UK TV landscape, likely clearing away world leading TV programmes and brands such as Strictly and Line of Duty. Who benefits from the defenestration of a universal cultural asset? Again, the big commercial players in the UK media, as well as foreign broadcasters.
Although the government will apparently safeguard the World Service, the ‘soft power’ of the BBC on behalf of the UK relies on the pipeline of talent, from Phoebe Waller Bridge back to Armando Iannucci and Monty Python. To diminish the BBC would be to diminish that pipeline and diminish the global standing of the UK’s main source of soft power.
At the moment, the government appear to want to force the BBC to shed Radio 1, Radio 2, 5 Live and 6 Music as well as BBC Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and local radio stations – many of which have stayed on-air through the night this weekend in the storms and flooding caused by Storm Dennis.
The ‘market’ certainly would not support the national and local services. Who would? It would chip away at the services valued by many ordinary working people. Labour needs to be passionately defending the BBC as a universal service in the interests of everyday consumers. No media empire is going to provide the depth of local provision that the BBC does.
For all the easy answers, blaming the media for Labour’s loss in December and refusing to defend public service broadcasting on the basis of some Twitter conspiracy threads demeans the party and the country as a whole. A media landscape without the BBC is much more commercially dominated, makes electing a Labour government much harder and damages a universal service that people across Britain rely on. The BBC should not have to rely on Damian Green and Huw Merriman to defend it – the labour movement and the wider left should rally to the defence of Auntie Beeb.


labourlist--2020-02-17--Caroline Flack’s death “should be a wake-up call” for government, Labour says

Labour ’ s spokesperson on culture has said that the death of English television presenter Caroline Flack “ should be a wake-up call ” for the government led by Boris Johnson .
Commenting ahead of a tribute to Flack being shown on ITV2 ’ s Love Island programme tonight , Labour frontbencher Tracy Brabin highlighted the importance of Leveson Inquiry part two .
“ Caroline Flack was relentlessly trolled online , but this trolling was amplified and legitimised by the mainstream press and they should not be allowed to dodge their share of the blame , ” Brabin said .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ curb abuse and ensure vulnerable people are safe online – and we need to hold the second stage of the Leveson Inquiry to protect victims of press abuse and intrusion .
Brain concluded : “ The current system simply isn ’ t working .
This tragic death should be a wake-up call for a government that has failed victims by refusing to act.
” 40-year-old Flack was found dead in her London flat on Saturday .
A lawyer for her family confirmed that her death , which followed allegations of assault against her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Leveson inquiry into press standards was meant to take place in two phases , the government dropped the second stage in 2018 as it described the exercise as “ costly ” and “ time-consuming ” .
Labour ’ s deputy leader Tom Watson condemned the decision at the time as “ a disappointment , a breach of trust and a bitter blow ” , though added that was “ not in any way a surprise ” .
The Conservative Party under Johnson ’ s leadership stuck by this policy , stating in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not proceed with the second stage of the Leveson Inquiry.
” Labour ’ s manifesto ahead of the 2019 general election said : “ We will address misconduct and the unresolved failures of corporate governance raised by the second stage of the abandoned Leveson Inquiry.
” It was revealed last week that the government is considering the appointment of telecoms and broadcasting regulator Ofcom to a new role that would also involve addressing online harms .
Labour raised concerns about the proposal , saying : “ The government ’ s own consultation suggests @ @ @ @ @ @ @ responding wanted to see a new regulator introduced.
” Labour leadership candidates were asked about the death of Flack at hustings over the weekend .
Keir Starmer said : “ It wasn ’ t just social media , it was the media amplifying what social media was doing .
It was both strands.
” Rebecca Long-Bailey added : “ Harry and Meghan have moved out of the country because of the way they have been treated by the media .
It is not acceptable.
” Lisa Nandy advocated further regulation of social media @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other area of life would we allow private companies to police themselves .
”

Labour’s spokesperson on culture has said that the death of English television presenter Caroline Flack “should be a wake-up call” for the government led by Boris Johnson.
Commenting ahead of a tribute to Flack being shown on ITV2’s Love Island programme tonight, Labour frontbencher Tracy Brabin highlighted the importance of Leveson Inquiry part two.
“Caroline Flack was relentlessly trolled online, but this trolling was amplified and legitimised by the mainstream press and they should not be allowed to dodge their share of the blame,” Brabin said.
“We urgently need new laws to curb abuse and ensure vulnerable people are safe online – and we need to hold the second stage of the Leveson Inquiry to protect victims of press abuse and intrusion.
Brain concluded: “The current system simply isn’t working. This tragic death should be a wake-up call for a government that has failed victims by refusing to act.”
40-year-old Flack was found dead in her London flat on Saturday. A lawyer for her family confirmed that her death, which followed allegations of assault against her boyfriend, was a suicide.
Although the Leveson inquiry into press standards was meant to take place in two phases, the government dropped the second stage in 2018 as it described the exercise as “costly” and “time-consuming”.
Labour’s deputy leader Tom Watson condemned the decision at the time as “a disappointment, a breach of trust and a bitter blow”, though added that was “not in any way a surprise”.
The Conservative Party under Johnson’s leadership stuck by this policy, stating in its 2019 manifesto: “We will not proceed with the second stage of the Leveson Inquiry.”
Labour’s manifesto ahead of the 2019 general election said: “We will address misconduct and the unresolved failures of corporate governance raised by the second stage of the abandoned Leveson Inquiry.”
It was revealed last week that the government is considering the appointment of telecoms and broadcasting regulator Ofcom to a new role that would also involve addressing online harms.
Labour raised concerns about the proposal, saying: “The government’s own consultation suggests that the majority of organisations and individuals responding wanted to see a new regulator introduced.”
Labour leadership candidates were asked about the death of Flack at hustings over the weekend. Keir Starmer said: “It wasn’t just social media, it was the media amplifying what social media was doing. It was both strands.”
Rebecca Long-Bailey added: “Harry and Meghan have moved out of the country because of the way they have been treated by the media. It is not acceptable.”
Lisa Nandy advocated further regulation of social media companies, saying: “In no other area of life would we allow private companies to police themselves.”


labourlist--2020-02-17--Catherine McKinnell: Why I’m backing Lisa Nandy for leader

The stakes for the Labour Party that rest on the outcome of this leadership campaign couldn ’ t be higher .
We face not only a battle to be heard by the electorate , but a fight for our very survival .
We now have three candidates marching towards the finish line and ballots will soon start to drop .
Now is a good time to pause to consider which leader can most effectively turn our fortunes around .
To think about who can reach out across the divide that has developed between Labour and many voters , and develop @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Labour Government once more .
With a majority Conservative government unleashing its horrors upon our communities on a daily basis , there is no time to lose .
Members of the Labour Party – by the very fact that they have taken the step to join a party – are inevitably more politically engaged than the vast majority of the voting public .
Let ’ s be honest , most people are just too busy to be following every twist , turn and nuance of Westminster melodrama .
So , when deciding who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not only consider the policies and records of the leadership hopefuls , but also put themselves into the shoes of those who are not party members .
In the limited time that members of the public have to contemplate these things , they will be looking for someone who speaks to and for them .
Through one vital medium – the recent televised debates – Lisa Nandy stood head and shoulders above the rest .
Her answers were clear , and spoken in a language that those beyond the inner working of Westminster @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of straight-talking that will confound and expose Boris Johnson at the despatch box .
She showed an uncanny ability to disagree with her colleagues whilst remaining respectful – an art that too often seems lost in our current political debate .
The general election was the worst electoral defeat since 1935 , so reaching the millions of people with which we need to reconnect is no minor task .
We need a leader who can perform well in the media .
Lisa has gone toe-to-toe with the likes of Andrew Neil and Piers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which is more than we can say about the current Prime Minister .
She leaves a Today programme grilling unscathed , maintaining her cool .
We know the next Labour leader will face a rough ride in the media and there ’ s no point just complaining about it – we need to pick an exceptional communicator who is up to the task .
Labour has a mountain to climb before the next election .
And the first step is getting a hearing from people who turned away from us in 2019 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Lisa can get us that hearing .
Recent polling from Lord Ashcroft found that Leave voters and Labour-Conservative switchers had the most positive associations with her , as a politician who is ‘ down to earth ’ , ‘ likeable ’ and ‘ in touch ’ .
Ipsos MORI polling found that , among those who know all four candidates , she has the highest favourability ratings .
If you want to see Lisa ’ s appeal first hand , watch this Channel 4 focus group of former Labour voters .
They @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would get them voting Labour again .
However , this is about more than just focus groups .
Ever since the election , Lisa has been travelling the country listening to the voters that left us in 2019 , from Ashfield to Bassetlaw to Plymouth .
She is ready to put the work in to win back the communities we lost .
In the time I have served with Lisa in parliament – we both entered in 2010 – Lisa has proven herself to be a politician who stands by her Labour values @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Michael Gove on free schools , or standing up for Palestinian rights whilst simultaneously showing zero tolerance for the rising antisemitism that has reared its ugly head in our party in recent years .
As Shadow Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change , she was one of the first politicians to champion a Green New Deal and brought 60 Labour councils together to defend the Paris agreement and cut the UK ’ s carbon footprint by 10 % .
Above all , Lisa has been determined to listen to the voters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to set out a vision for the future .
From her pioneering work with the Centre for Towns , she knows that for Labour to be back in government we have to build on the power we have locally and be rooted in our communities again .
This week should mark a turning point in the leadership race .
It ’ s clear that Lisa is a candidate who can win back the country whilst staying true to our party ’ s values .
She will be a leader with the charisma to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and to promise a brighter future for those we were founded to represent .
Now is not the time to play it safe – it ’ s going to take a bold offer and a huge amount of bravery to turn Labour ’ s fortunes around .
Lisa has demonstrated she will be a leader who has both in spades .

The stakes for the Labour Party that rest on the outcome of this leadership campaign couldn’t be higher. We face not only a battle to be heard by the electorate, but a fight for our very survival. We now have three candidates marching towards the finish line and ballots will soon start to drop. Now is a good time to pause to consider which leader can most effectively turn our fortunes around.
To think about who can reach out across the divide that has developed between Labour and many voters, and develop a message profound enough to deliver a Labour Government once more. With a majority Conservative government unleashing its horrors upon our communities on a daily basis, there is no time to lose.
Members of the Labour Party – by the very fact that they have taken the step to join a party – are inevitably more politically engaged than the vast majority of the voting public. Let’s be honest, most people are just too busy to be following every twist, turn and nuance of Westminster melodrama. So, when deciding who to support, Labour members need to not only consider the policies and records of the leadership hopefuls, but also put themselves into the shoes of those who are not party members. In the limited time that members of the public have to contemplate these things, they will be looking for someone who speaks to and for them.
Through one vital medium – the recent televised debates – Lisa Nandy stood head and shoulders above the rest. Her answers were clear, and spoken in a language that those beyond the inner working of Westminster relate to. She demonstrated the kind of straight-talking that will confound and expose Boris Johnson at the despatch box. She showed an uncanny ability to disagree with her colleagues whilst remaining respectful – an art that too often seems lost in our current political debate.
The general election was the worst electoral defeat since 1935, so reaching the millions of people with which we need to reconnect is no minor task. We need a leader who can perform well in the media. Lisa has gone toe-to-toe with the likes of Andrew Neil and Piers Morgan and come out on top, which is more than we can say about the current Prime Minister. She leaves a Today programme grilling unscathed, maintaining her cool. We know the next Labour leader will face a rough ride in the media and there’s no point just complaining about it – we need to pick an exceptional communicator who is up to the task.
Labour has a mountain to climb before the next election. And the first step is getting a hearing from people who turned away from us in 2019. There is now plenty of evidence showing that Lisa can get us that hearing. Recent polling from Lord Ashcroft found that Leave voters and Labour-Conservative switchers had the most positive associations with her, as a politician who is ‘down to earth’, ‘likeable’ and ‘in touch’. Ipsos MORI polling found that, among those who know all four candidates, she has the highest favourability ratings.
If you want to see Lisa’s appeal first hand, watch this Channel 4 focus group of former Labour voters. They unanimously see Lisa as the politician who would get them voting Labour again. However, this is about more than just focus groups. Ever since the election, Lisa has been travelling the country listening to the voters that left us in 2019, from Ashfield to Bassetlaw to Plymouth. She is ready to put the work in to win back the communities we lost.
In the time I have served with Lisa in parliament – we both entered in 2010 – Lisa has proven herself to be a politician who stands by her Labour values. Whether that’s taking on Michael Gove on free schools, or standing up for Palestinian rights whilst simultaneously showing zero tolerance for the rising antisemitism that has reared its ugly head in our party in recent years. As Shadow Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, she was one of the first politicians to champion a Green New Deal and brought 60 Labour councils together to defend the Paris agreement and cut the UK’s carbon footprint by 10%.
Above all, Lisa has been determined to listen to the voters to understand where we went wrong and to set out a vision for the future. From her pioneering work with the Centre for Towns, she knows that for Labour to be back in government we have to build on the power we have locally and be rooted in our communities again.
This week should mark a turning point in the leadership race. It’s clear that Lisa is a candidate who can win back the country whilst staying true to our party’s values. She will be a leader with the charisma to win back the voters we lost, and to promise a brighter future for those we were founded to represent. Now is not the time to play it safe – it’s going to take a bold offer and a huge amount of bravery to turn Labour’s fortunes around. Lisa has demonstrated she will be a leader who has both in spades.


labourlist--2020-02-17--Labour should combat transphobia through education, not expulsions

There is undoubtedly an issue of transphobia in the Labour Party .
The Labour Campaign for Trans Rights has been set up to combat this , as well as fight for positive advances for the rights of trans and non-binary people .
We do this with a recognition that the Labour Party and the wider labour movement are crucial for winning and consolidating the rights of marginalised people within society .
Of course , transphobia is prevalent within society as a whole , but we must put our own house in order if we are to change the world .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ labour movement benefits from the most marginalised people being able to freely , confidently and safely organise themselves and fight for better conditions .
We recognise that the fight against women ’ s oppression and trans oppression are part of the same struggle – and those that seek to wrongly divide us only weaken our collective strength .
We all stand to gain from the ability of trans people , within Labour and our trade unions , to organise and win .
It is important to address the question of how transphobia should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of bigotry on the left , this is a point of contention .
I am going to argue that we should not make the mistake of relying on bureaucratic machinery to solve problems of miseducation and ignorance .
There have been popular calls amongst many of those in the party who oppose transphobia – and indeed antisemitism – to expel members who express such views .
Despite this being one of the pledges put forward by LCTR , of which I am a member and co-founder , this position is understandable but misguided @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cases in which protracted campaigns of harassment and bullying have taken place against activists in the party , and in these cases suspension and expulsion may be an appropriate course of action .
But the problem of transphobia is widespread .
If Labour were to attempt to purge the party of transphobic views bureaucratically , it is likely to end up expelling swathes of people whose transphobic views are not well-thought-out .
Instead , they may be ignorant , or see their advocacy of women ’ s rights as being in conflict with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expulsions would not only distance us from many who could , with some patience and education , be won round to the cause of trans rights .
It would also serve to make party machinery the decision-maker as to who has crossed the line and therefore must be expelled .
Such a situation would make Labour ’ s current inadequate democratic culture even worse .
If not expulsions , then what ?
I would advocate for a concerted campaign of education on the topic of trans rights as well as a culture of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where our ideas come from , and it is the lifeblood of a vibrant labour movement .
This position can be caricatured : some assume that what is being called for is a staged debate between a trans person on one side and someone who seeks to deny trans people of their right to any kind of dignified existence on the other .
This is , of course , not what is meant .
What I ’ m talking about is fora in which people are able to effectively challenge and convince those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of supporting the rights of trans and non-binary people .
We have to educate activists – including trans people , as well as cis allies – in order to give people the skills to confidently challenge these ideas wherever they rear their head in the labour movement .
LCTR will have a key role to play in facilitating education in the Labour Party and creating a culture in which trans and non-binary people are able to engage in the movement that best represents their class interests .
We all stand to gain from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ concerned with fighting for a better party will join us in the struggle .

There is undoubtedly an issue of transphobia in the Labour Party. The Labour Campaign for Trans Rights has been set up to combat this, as well as fight for positive advances for the rights of trans and non-binary people. We do this with a recognition that the Labour Party and the wider labour movement are crucial for winning and consolidating the rights of marginalised people within society. Of course, transphobia is prevalent within society as a whole, but we must put our own house in order if we are to change the world.
This is a two-way street. The labour movement benefits from the most marginalised people being able to freely, confidently and safely organise themselves and fight for better conditions. We recognise that the fight against women’s oppression and trans oppression are part of the same struggle – and those that seek to wrongly divide us only weaken our collective strength. We all stand to gain from the ability of trans people, within Labour and our trade unions, to organise and win.
It is important to address the question of how transphobia should be fought. As with similar issues of bigotry on the left, this is a point of contention. I am going to argue that we should not make the mistake of relying on bureaucratic machinery to solve problems of miseducation and ignorance. There have been popular calls amongst many of those in the party who oppose transphobia – and indeed antisemitism – to expel members who express such views. Despite this being one of the pledges put forward by LCTR, of which I am a member and co-founder, this position is understandable but misguided in my view.
There are individual cases in which protracted campaigns of harassment and bullying have taken place against activists in the party, and in these cases suspension and expulsion may be an appropriate course of action. But the problem of transphobia is widespread. If Labour were to attempt to purge the party of transphobic views bureaucratically, it is likely to end up expelling swathes of people whose transphobic views are not well-thought-out. Instead, they may be ignorant, or see their advocacy of women’s rights as being in conflict with trans rights.
Such a wave of expulsions would not only distance us from many who could, with some patience and education, be won round to the cause of trans rights. It would also serve to make party machinery the decision-maker as to who has crossed the line and therefore must be expelled. Such a situation would make Labour’s current inadequate democratic culture even worse.
If not expulsions, then what? I would advocate for a concerted campaign of education on the topic of trans rights as well as a culture of open debate and discussion. This is where our ideas come from, and it is the lifeblood of a vibrant labour movement. This position can be caricatured: some assume that what is being called for is a staged debate between a trans person on one side and someone who seeks to deny trans people of their right to any kind of dignified existence on the other. This is, of course, not what is meant.
What I’m talking about is fora in which people are able to effectively challenge and convince those that hold transphobic views of the importance of supporting the rights of trans and non-binary people. We have to educate activists – including trans people, as well as cis allies – in order to give people the skills to confidently challenge these ideas wherever they rear their head in the labour movement.
LCTR will have a key role to play in facilitating education in the Labour Party and creating a culture in which trans and non-binary people are able to engage in the movement that best represents their class interests. We all stand to gain from this, and we hope that those concerned with fighting for a better party will join us in the struggle.