LAST December, a great opportunity was missed to return a Labour government with Jeremy Corbyn at the helm. Now, even before Corbyn officially steps down and a new leader is elected, there are worrying signs ahead for party members on the left.

In 2013 under the leadership of Ed Miliband, I wrote in the Morning Star that there was a need for a new party that could represent the working class.

A party that would stand by its principles on “equality for all” and would not capitulate any of its principles and values to obtain power.

In response to my call, comrades thought differently and urged the left to stay and fight from within.

Although I believed that to be a waste of time, time which could have been better used strengthening a new party, I was forced to eat my words when Corbyn was elected as Labour leader.

We knew Corbyn faced a challenge from the Establishment in his fight to oust the Tories, however I doubt many of us could have predicted just how bad, cruel and dirty the attacks on him would become, moreover not just from outside his own party.

The media attacks on Corbyn were by far the worst many of us have witnessed on a politician, possibly since 1981 when Michael Foot as Labour leader faced ridicule over apparently wearing a “donkey jacket” at a wreath-laying ceremony on Remembrance Sunday.

The right-wing press labelled Foot “Wurzel Gummidge,” after a TV series about a scarecrow, with the claim that it was disrespectful to wear such an item associated with labouring jobs at an occasion such as remembering those who sacrificed their lives in war.

The fact that Foot’s coat wasn’t a donkey jacket but an expensive Jaeger overcoat purchased from Harrods didn’t prevent the story becoming a tabloid headline, believed by many to this day.

The attacks became darker with a picture of Corbyn in a coffin appearing in the press, and reports of his image being used for target practice by the parachute regiment.

Personal criticism ranged from his apparent reluctance to press a nuclear button to kill millions of innocent people — as if it was a bad thing — to allegations of Corbyn failing to sing the national anthem.

Having overcome a challenge to his leadership, ridden out and dispelled the “terrorist sympathiser” tag along with the allegations of anti-Semitism, Corbyn was finally undone by agreeing to bend on his promise to honour the EU referendum result, and instead agreed to a second referendum if Labour won the election.

All this demonstrates the lengths to which those who are opposed to socialism, both within and outside of the Labour party, will go to prevent a left-wing government ever taking power.

Knowing this, the question is now what is the future for those on the left in the Labour Party?

Of all the candidates to be the next leader, the obvious one to take up the challenge of running with a left-wing agenda would be Rebecca Long Bailey, and while I have no doubt that if successful with her bid she would want to continue with the socialist agenda set by Corbyn, these last few years have demonstrated what is in store for anyone willing to tread such a path.

Along with attacks from her own comrades, Long Bailey would be subjected to a media campaign relentlessly pursuing her as punishment for having the audacity of continuing with the Corbyn agenda.

I imagine every posting Long Bailey has placed on social media is being scrutinised and stored to be used at a later date if necessary.

Although I have no doubt that Long Bailey would be determined enough to withstand whatever is thrown at her, my concern is that despite her good intentions, there are warning signs that a change in direction has already taken place, with all candidates agreeing to the demands of the Board of Deputies (BoD) by signing up to its 10 pledges.

Discussing this subject on the Andrew Neil Show, another of the candidates, Lisa Nandy, worryingly gave an example of how one of these pledges could be used to silence criticism, by suggesting that a tweet posted by a Labour Party member which read: “The BoD should condemn the actions of Israeli military atrocities in the West Bank” constituted anti-Semitism — and suggested the member responsible should face suspension pending investigation.

The fact is to criticise Israel in the way any other country would be criticised does not constitute anti-Semitism. Nor, in my opinion, is it unreasonable to ask any organisation to condemn unnecessary violence. That said, that doesn’t mean that someone will not perceive it as such and lodge a complaint, as is their right, and there lies the problem.

If an allegation is made, suspension would follow while an outside agency investigates. In addition, should any other member speak out in support of the suspended member, as many members did when Chris Williamson was suspended, in order to comply with the 10 pledges they too would face the same action, suspension then investigation.

Because of this, I suspect that many members, in particular MPs, will err on the side of caution and stay completely silent on matters of this nature, which I would suggest is exactly what the pledges are designed to do.

We already have complete silence from MPs afraid to speak out in support of families in the North of Ireland fighting for Truth & Justice for alleged crimes during the “Troubles” in Ireland — although thankfully there are party members that will.

Labour Party members may soon need to make a choice. Stay, fight — but be selective on what injustice you speak out against – or leave, join another party maybe and speak out on all injustice, no matter where it occurs.

While comrades must reach their own decision, for me, the choice is clear: as a socialist my voice is not for sale, not even for the opportunity of electing a Labour government.