By Stuart McGee
This article seeks to present a balance sheet of where we are in Your Party so far. It attempts a broad recap of the ups and downs of the new project since Zarah Sultana announced, in July, that she would be leaving the Labour Party and jointly leading the setting up a new party with Jeremy Corbyn.
Sultana’s announcement of a new party caused panic in some circles, particularly among elements who believed that Jeremy should be the sole leader. Others felt that Zarah’s announcement was necessary, that there had been unacceptable dithering, and unless something was done, nothing would be done. The perception we were left with was that the announcement had been botched.
Very little then happened at a national level for almost three months. With the exception of the claims on social media that hundreds of thousands had expressed an interest in this project.
The same cannot be said of many local areas, where enthusiastic rank and file activists were setting up “proto branches” of Your Party, despite not having access to any membership details.
Then in the last week in September we were informed by the anonymous leadership of Your Party that an inaugural national conference was going to take place in November and that there were going to be preparatory regional assemblies throughout October and into November, at which founding documents were going to be discussed. We had to start understanding new words like ‘sortition’, which appears to be another word for lottery, and ‘demonstrative democracy’.
We were also informed that there was soon going to be a membership portal set up so as the hundreds of thousands of us who had supposedly expressed an interest could join properly.
This is when the second, and this time very major, spat very publicly erupted. Nothing had happened, for what seemed like an inordinate amount of time, and then an email was sent out by Zarah saying that a membership portal had been opened. This was followed a few hours later by another email from the ‘Jeremy camp’ saying this was an unauthorised portal.
Unseemly exchanges
There then followed unseemly exchanges between our leading luminaries, with unacceptable threats of legal action and accusations of misogyny being made. It is crystal clear, for those who are prepared to look, that for some of those involved, control of membership data and the financial arrangements is the absolute priority. It was blatantly obvious that a raw nerve had been touched and that this was the real reason and root cause that was behind this unedifying and demoralising spectacle.
This embarrassing exchange caused untold damage. It was potentially disastrous. If we are to believe it, 800,000 had initially expressed an interest. Just over a month later, when the official membership figure was announced, only 50,000 had actually joined – just one in sixteen – though that still made it the biggest ever left party outside Labour.
membership figures
Despite the official line, that everyone has since made up and it was only birth pains, the reality is somewhat different. To this day there are legal threats in relation to the release of membership data and a seemingly endless string of unscrupulous leaks to the establishment media. One of the Independent Alliance MPs that have been working with Corbyn, Adnan Hussain, has just announced on social media that he is walking away from the project. He had previously clashed with Zarah Sultana, both politically and over financial matters.
Yet, while this appalling behaviour has been going on at the top level, fantastic work continues at a rank and file level. There have continued to be large public meetings and proto branches set up the length and breadth of the country.
There has been much consternation at a rank and file level, at least among the more experienced comrades, not only at the behaviour at the top level, but at the way the inaugural conference is being organised, such as the anonymous nature of the authors of the policy and organisational documents. And there are many other criticisms, too numerous to go into here.
No blanket criticism
However it would be wrong to dismiss the project and adopt blanket criticism. That only devalues legitimate criticism of specific issues. Above all we must have honesty. If there are no fully established formal branches, it is impossible to hold a conference that is truly democratic and representative. We are where we are. So I think it is appropriate to cut a bit of slack in relation to this issue.
Likewise with the first drafts of founding documents. Someone has to write the first draft and it is now down to us, the membership, to delete any incorrect, vague or unacceptable clauses and replace them with the appropriate socialist political programme and democratic organisational set up.
Many of us view with fear and trepidation the upcoming national conference. We hope for the best but fear for the worst. However, barring the conference being an absolute disaster, this is not going to be the defining event, in my opinion. In the first quarter of 2026, there will be the election of a leader and a Central Executive Committee, planned to take power next March, leaving control in the hands of the same shadowy group until then.
It looks clear that the leader will be Corbyn. In my opinion, though, it is the make-up of the executive that will be the defining point. If the majority is made up of honest hard working comrades, who can be trusted with holding the unelected officials to account, Your Party, or whatever it is called by then, is in with a chance. If not and the unelected and unaccountable are allowed to carry on pulling the strings in the same vein as they have been, the project could crash and burn.
That is why we must continue the work of building the proto branches and especially recruiting the ‘hundreds of thousands’ who expressed an interest but have held back from joining, given what has been going on.
The opportunity still exists to make a material difference and make sure this project works, and fulfils the hopes that so many have placed in it.
We must elect a leadership that is capable of leading and holding those who are currently unaccountable to account. If you are not a member, you will not be able to vote
IF YOU SUPPORT YOUR PARTY – JOIN IT AND VOTE FOR A GENUINELY DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST PARTY.
[featured photos – Jeremy Corbyn – photo Raph_PH, wiki commons – credit here. Zarah Sultana – photo ReelNews, wiki commons – credit here]
I find it sad that some people are getting carried away with this nonsense, have they learned nothing? These people are politicians at the end of the day. Even if they do manage to get into government (unlikely), what is their plan to stand up to the global, cross national, technocratic forces of capital? And when has there ever been an example where the parliamentary road to socialism has gotten the working class anywhere?
It seems obvious to me that this project is simply a DSA 2.0. https://www.democracycollaborative.org/blogs/your-party-turbulent-beginnings-for-a-new-left-party-in-britain
I doubt this shadowy cabal have been twiddling their thumbs over the past three months and I feel sad for all those people wasting their time on a fake consultation exercise.
I’d like to know what this ‘enormous potential’ is. If it is to get people elected into important positions then I would say they have a slim to moderate chance.
The “Your Party” MPs have led the way, albeit some of them being landlords and renting out housing, which to my mind is not socialist at all. But the MPs have led the way and to some extent have made a hash of setting up that party. Therefore, it’s time for the MPs to get out of the way and let ordinary members move that party forward. Mine own initial enthusiasm for the setting up of a socialist “Your Party” has been tempered by the actions of those MPs.