In the next few weeks, Constituency Labour Parties will be asked to nominate and vote for six places on Labour’s National Constitutional Committee (NCC). These six places are part of an agreed increase in the personnel of this important committee, which oversees investigations and makes decisions in cases where members are suspended or excluded from membership. In this election process, Left Horizons urges its readers and supporters to vote for the left slate put forward by the Campaign for Labour Party Democracy. The six candidates they are proposing are as follows:
Kaneez Akthar, Keighley and Ilkely CLP (* but see postscript below)
Gary Heather, Islington North CLP
Khaled Moyeed, Tottenham CLP,
Annabelle Harle, Cardiff West CLP,
Stephen Marks, Oxford East CLP,
Cecile Wright, Derby North CLP.
Full details of these nominees, including their Labour Party membership numbers, can be obtained from: http://www.clpd.org.uk/
Although the expansion of the NCC was agreed by conference and it has a backlog of disciplinary cases to resolve, the election of these six new members looks like it is being conducted with undue haste and, because CLPs vote as organisations, it is without also the participation of the big majority of members. This is in contrast, for example, to elections for NEC positions, which are conducted on the basis of one member one vote.
It remains to be seen whether or not an enlarged NCC will restore confidence in the disciplinary processes in the party. It is a disgrace that up and down the country so many party members are suspended on the flimsiest of pretexts and then often left hanging for months, without any due process and without the benefits of any form of natural justice. The only reason why there hasn’t been a massive outcry among Party members over this issue – and it didn’t feature at all in an otherwise very radical conference last month – is that the scale of the suspensions and expulsions is kept hidden from the scrutiny of members.
Rather than expanding the NCC, it would be far better if the so-called ‘Compliance Unit’ were wound up and a more transparent and democratic system introduced in its place. If they are ‘charged’ with some offence, Labour Party members of years of standing ought to be allowed to continue to participate fully in the life of the Party, unless and until they are found to be in serious breach of the rules. It is unacceptable that so many members are suspended first and ‘investigated’ later, in some cases years later. But, unfortunately, until the NEC or the Labour conference takes an axe to the Compliance Unit, we are stuck with the NCC and its 25 elected members.
Fake “anti-Semitism”
What also gives this election some particular importance is the context of the fake “anti-Semitism” campaign by the retreating right-wing of the Party. As we have argued consistently, the entire issue of anti-Semitism has been artificially created to undermine Jeremy Corbyn, while also stifling criticism of the Israeli state. Now that the NEC has adopted the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism, and notwithstanding assurances that Party members are free to criticise the policies of the state of Israel, there are those in the Party who will now want to use the IHRA definition and the mechanism of the NCC to exclude the most vociferous critics of Israel from the Party.
It is in this context too that we have the complicating factor of a split in the left slate for the NCC. It appears that the Momentum leadership has refused to support a joint left slate because, according to a CLPD statement, “Momentum are not backing a Jewish candidate who supports Palestinian human rights”. According to an article on the Squawkbox website, there were negotiations conducted between the CLPD and Momentum, but Jon Lansman, the boss of Momentum, objected to a particular nominee of the CLPD who was a prominent member of Jewish Voice for Labour (JVL).
If this is accurate, then it fits into a pattern of behaviour for the Momentum leadership.
Since the coup in Momentum in January last year, the story of that organisation has been a steady drift to the right and an accommodation with those who would roll back the radicalisation of the Party, if give the chance. Although the selection of their slate was not perfect, at least the CLPD, with the LRC and others on the left, appears to have tried in good faith to arrive at a single slate of left candidates. Unfortunately, the Momentum leadership have not acted with the same good faith. It is their way or nothing and, as usual, they have not consulted the membership of Momentum. Hence, we have two left slates.
Momentum leadership ditched open selection
In the long run, the opaque and undemocratic methods of the Momentum leadership will not last. Momentum achieved its remarkable strength from the impetus it gained in two leadership election campaigns in 2015 and 2016 and the general election in 2017. It has a sizeable bureaucracy based on the income from tens of thousands of members. But its political support will not last forever.
While the Momentum slate was successful in the elections to the constituency places on the NEC before conference, it was notable that the one candidate who had been dropped by Momentum was still, nevertheless, elected. Likewise, at Labour Party conference, when Momentum did a second about-turn on re-selection (the first being to back open selection of parliamentary candidates) and urged its supporters to ditch open selection, two thirds of CLP delegates ignored them. The NEC position was only carried by the votes of the trade union delegates, some against their own union conference decisions.
Today, the Momentum leadership are quibbling over candidates they dislike, always giving ground to Labour’s right wing on the issue of “anti-Semitism”. Tomorrow, the same Momentum leadership will be wringing their hands as good lefts and socialists are suspended or expelled from the Party. On the day after tomorrow, it will be the Momentum leaders in the forefront of the demands for the expulsion of socialists.
The so-called ‘Corbyn revolution’ in the Labour Party has never been about personalities. It has always been about ideas and policies. The more the Momentum leadership and other ‘soft lefts’ give ground to the policies and ideas of the right wing, the more they will come to resent and oppose those on the left who remain firm and committed to socialist ideas. The Labour Party conference showed unmistakeably that in future the real debates in the Labour Party will not be between the old right and the left, because the support of the right is rapidly tailing off. The debate will be between the socialist left and the ‘soft left’, like the current Momentum leadership, who will always be ready to give the kiss of life to a dying right wing, the better to capitulate to them.
October 15, 2018
Postscript:
Following further discussions, a united left slate is now being supported by the Campaign for Labour Party Democracy, Jewish Voice for Labour, Labour Briefing, Labour CND and Momentum. The six candidates of this joint slate are Annabelle Harle, Gary Heather, Stephen Marks, Khaled Moyeed, Cecile Wright and Susan Press. We are happy to publicise this new slate, which Left Horizons will support. However, we stand by our comments on the fundamentally undemocratic nature and the political trajectory of the Momentum leadership.
October 17, 2018
