Terms of reference set by Labour NEC for investigation into leaked report – full text
Published
by
Richard Kuper
JVL Introduction
So we have the terms of reference at long last.
Why on earth, when the NEC met on 23rd April last week, do we have to wait until one newly elected local party representative Johanna Baxter happened included the full text in her first NEC report five days later.
Why aren’t decisions like this routinely publicised immediately on the Labour Party website?
Why are members kept in the dark about basic decisions made by our leading body, the NEC?
This article was originally published by LabourList on Tue 28 Apr 2020. Read the original here.
Terms of reference set by Labour NEC for investigation into leaked report – full text
Loading article text…
well it looks like a stitch up really
Given a free hand, what will the panel choose as its “main allegations”? The main argument made by the report, and perhaps the reason for its commissioning, appears in the conclusion (page 849): “The “unwritten guidelines” from LOTO, which are referenced in the JLM submssion to the Commission’s investigation simply did not exist and all the evidence shows that LOTO could not exercise any authority over GLU.” The report is essentially a series of counter-allegations (against factional senior staff) in response to allegations (against the party leadership) made to the Equality and Human Rights Commission over who was to blame for the Labour Party’s failure to address antisemitism in the period 2015 to March 2018.
Will the Panel opt to take on this issue, and if so will it support one of the opposing viewpoints, or will it offer an ‘on the one hand…on the other…’ compromise?
Depends 9n who they choose to investigate
Who do you trust
Jennie, Karie or Len
Michael, Craig or Chris
A.N.Other
What about Elected representatives who colluded with those identified in this document in undermining our elected leadership eg TOM Watson ?
The grasp of the English language by the NEC doesn’t exactly fill me with any confidence in Labour.
I would like to know how a senior management group were allowed to have so much power .They were able to infiltrate and work as a party within a party.Manipulating and destructive they helped to lose us the 2017 election. Why have those people not been suspended and sacked .They worked against the core objectives to win elections .Shame on the labour party.
As a person whose name appears several times in the leaked document this is of great interest to me, though no longer a member of the Labour Party I expect to see maximum transparency in every aspect of this matter. It would at least make me feel that my past four years in the Labour Party have not been wasted however much sabotage took place and it might suggest who I can sue.
Have I missed something? Surely the most important revelations were,
1. The deliberate undermining of the 2017 GE campaign facilitating a Tory victory with all the very serious consequences, including 30000 annual NHS underfunding deaths.
2. Attempts to falsely blame Corbyn for the delays in dealing with antisemitism complaints, including lies to the media including the Panorama programme.
Call me old fashioned, naïve & simplistic but the bottom line should be this .
If you are a member (or in this case an employee) of the Labour Party you work for, vote for and support the election of a Labour Government.
If you write letters to the Guardian (Trevor Phillips) asking people not to vote Labour you leave the Party. If you an affiliated organisation (JLM) that agitates against voting Labour – you leave the Party.
If anyone is any doubt about the principle behind this, then play for a football team and start kicking the ball at your own goal & see how the other players react. See what the crowd will say to you (so you can whine about how harassed you have been)
I feel sick knowing the Labour Party worked to get a Tory government in to power. It’s just disgusting I would like my membership money back how can any socialist party behave like this ?