Skip to main content

Labour has shot itself in the foot over Corbyn

DIANE ABBOTT MP argues that there is no good reason to block Jeremy Corbyn as a Labour candidate

NO good reason has been offered for the blocking of Jeremy Corbyn as a Labour candidate at the next election. There was certainly no good reason advanced in the motion that went to the NEC.

Instead, the flimsiest pretext was offered in the text of the motion itself, which I criticised at the time as being without logic or precedent. The stated reason for blocking him was that “the Labour Party’s interests, and its political interests at the next general election, are not well served by Mr Corbyn running as a Labour Party candidate.”

The rationale for this judgement was threadbare, simply arguing that Labour’s very bad result in the 2019 general election, which no-one disputes, was sufficient to claim that Corbyn being a candidate that the next election would “diminish” Labour’s electoral prospects nationally and that this was sufficient grounds to block him.

It is worth noting that there is no attempt to bar Corbyn as a member of the Labour Party. This would follow, for example, where a member was held to have brought the party into disrepute or some other serious charge.

Corbyn faced no such charge and will remain a member of the Labour Party. As such, it cannot logically be argued, even by his most vocal critics that he has done anything which in principle justifies blocking his candidacy.

Instead, the proponents and supporters of the motion seem to rely solely on a subjective and tactical judgement that Corbyn would be bad for Labour’s prospects. They may not like Corbyn and Corbynism but many millions of voters still do. Barring Corbyn narrows our appeal to them. It is a bizarre approach.

There is nothing in the Labour Party rulebook or its practice over
decades to suggest electoral failure is a bar to being a candidate, as Neil Kinnock and many other less exalted figures could testify. 

In recent memory, Gordon Brown also led the party to severe electoral defeat at a national level. So too did Jim Callaghan before him.

Further, and despite what his supporters might claim, Tony Blair led the party to disastrous set of local election results in May 2007. We lost a calamitous 665 seats and he had to resign just days later.

Under John Smith in 1993 we had a little over 9,200 councillors. Under Blair the total plummeted to little over 2,200.

All of these leaders would no doubt have argued that a certain set of political circumstances conspired against them, with some justification.

And they could further argue that any failure was a collective one of the party as a whole.

Yet no other leader has faced this type of ban on standing in a following election. On more substantive grounds, Corbyn has not brought the party into disrepute, and there is nothing in the rulebook which supports this type of sanction against him.

On the contrary, the power to select candidates for elections clearly rests with the party in the constituency, as the rules clearly state. 

A statement from the officers of Islington North CLP makes it crystal clear where they stand: “We believe in the democratic right of all constituency parties to choose their prospective parliamentary candidate. Therefore, we reject the NEC’s interference in Islington North, which undermines our goal of defeating the Conservatives and working with our communities for social justice,” their statement reads.

Like many others, the CLP officers also point out that this action taken against Corbyn stands in complete opposition to the repeated assurances from Keir Starmer himself about local party democracy, including in his “Ten pledges” where, under the tenth pledge to “offer effective opposition to the Tories,” he said he would “Unite our party, promote pluralism and improve our culture.”

This is perhaps the most damaging part of the latest move against the left of the party and its most prominent leader. It is a point not lost on the officers of Islington North. It may also be the uppermost consideration for those members and affiliates not caught up in this factional battle.

This is the question of whether this helps or hinders the fight against these Tories, and our campaign to oust this rotten government.

Vigorously attacking the left is not effective opposition to the Tories, nor should it ever be seen as a substitute for it.

Following the bitter election defeat in 2019 the Tories are only too happy to talk about Corbyn because they have effectively demonised him — at least in the eyes of some voters. But they have been doing this for years now and yet they are languishing in the polls.

The effectivenessof this strategy is highly questionable. The one way it could gain traction is if the Labour leadership chimes in.  

When both sets of leaders of the main parties are saying the same thing, many voters will tend to believe the consensus. But if anyone in Labour reckons this will boost our electoral prospects, as the motion suggests, they are guilty of reckless naivete at best.

Starmer cannot rewrite the historical record that he served in a
Corbyn shadow cabinet and publicly praised him. 

The Tories are trying to use that fact as an albatross to hang around Starmer’s neck. Running around shouting about the dangers of albatrosses will not do  Starmer any good. Or the Labour Party.  

Instead, as Corbyn said in his own statement: “Keir Starmer has
broken his commitment to respect the rights of Labour members and denigrated the democratic foundations of our party.” 

Very many members — and not all of them committed supporters of Corbynism — share that view. Some have forecast that arbitrarily blocking Corbyn as a candidate is a sign that further measures against the rest of the left are in the pipeline.

In reality a string of strong candidates with wide local backing have
already been blocked from shortlists or selection. The action against Corbyn is part of an established and deeply undemocratic trend.

There is an alternative. It would begin with our main task, which is to unite our party in preparation for the next general election and to fight the Tories.

This would require are the very least a sharp reduction in
factionalism, an end to spurious claims and catch-all complaints. We
need to genuinely shift to “promoting pluralism and improving our
culture.”

Crucially, it would entail rescinding this unprecedented sanction against Corbyn and the restoration of the rights of Labour members.

Diane Abbott is MP for Hackney North and Stoke Newington. Follow her on Twitter @HackneyAbbott.

OWNED BY OUR READERS

We're a reader-owned co-operative, which means you can become part of the paper too by buying shares in the People’s Press Printing Society.

 

 

Become a supporter

Fighting fund

You've Raised:£ 13,288
We need:£ 4,712
3 Days remaining
Donate today