JVL’s fourth submission to the EHRC
Lessons to be drawn from experience of the Labour Party Action Plan on Antisemitism
To help fund the legal help we are receiving to pursue our request to the EHRC, please refer to our CrowdJustice appeal.
JVL has made a fourth submission to the EHRC responding on issues the EHRC has highlighted for us. Labour Party’s action plan on driving out antisemitism. The submission covers:
- the Party’s process for appointing its Advisory Board on antisemitism;
- its failure to engage with a range of stakeholders;
- its failure / delay in responding to complaints;
- the disproportionate number of actioned complaints taken against Jewish Party members, and in particular Jewish anti-Zionist members;
- its failure to keep complainants updated with the progress of their complaints;
- breaches of the code of conduct on confidentiality and extensive delays in responding to SAR requests.
In each of these areas we have identified actions by the Party which are detrimental to Party members who are at odds with the current Labour leadership establishment. The pernicious processes are then compounded by bureaucratic incompetence.
The submission reports on the disproportionate number of actioned complaints taken against Jewish Party members, and in particular anti-Zionist members. It examines, in particular, the cases of six Jewish members: Mike Howard, Jonathan Rosenhead, Pam Laurance, Jenny Manson, Stephen Marks and Diana Neslen.
JVL has consistently argued that lumping the occasional real instances of antisemitism together with the multitude of false accusations often aimed at political anti-Zionism diverts attention from the real and growing danger to Jews of the violent antisemitism of the far-right.
Read JVL’s fourth submission to the EHRC
Well done for pursuing this. You, as Jewish people, are in the best position to take on the EHRC and it’s persecution of the left wing of the Labour Party. Don’t give up. Solidarity!
“5. It is now left to his widow to instruct Bindmans, who sent a further reminder to the Party dated 1 December 2021, noting Mr Howard’s death; appallingly, still there has been no response, even acknowledging the tragedy, let alone progressing the appeal.”
This is an appalling reflection on what the Labour Party has seemingly become. I would welcome any evidence even to suggest to the contrary. I see none. Labour, which a few short years ago was offering hope, now offers nothing.
A powerful piece and one that’s beautifully argued. Thank you.
It’s not only the politicisation of AS accusations/smears, but also the level of sheer incompetence/rudeness, in not being able to respond to the most basic of queries. The staff seem/ed unable to answer even the most basic of Qs ~ like: ‘what did you mean to ask/state, your question is incomplete/makes no sense’. I, literally, over my working life, have never had to deal with such basic uselessness. If they were my students, I would send them back to explain, or would have no other option than to fail them! Even car park sharks/firms of bailiffs ~ not known for their politeness and/or customer service skills, have made a better *fist* of it. Grrr …
All power your elbow JVL!
However have the EHRC responded to any of your
previous submissions yet – I seem to have lost track.
PS I now see from your submission that the EHRC
HAVE responded to your previous communications.
AS you correctly state this is much more than the
Labour Party managed so I await with hope.
A wonderfully clear, well researched and important submission. Although I haven’t been threatened with suspension myself I feel enormous anger and distress thinking of those who have and how isolated and forgotten they must feel. Thankyou JVL for your persistence and speaking up for us all.
Yes, Jan Brooker, that really angers me also. The pompous and patronising quasi-legal language in the accusatory letters, contrasted with the incompetence and rudeness displayed when the recipients do not simply lie down and allow themselves to be browbeaten, is quite breath taking. I had a long working life but would have found myself unemployed very quickly had I behaved in this manner. Another aspect is that the language used is indeed that of an employer – employee relationship. Fine and honourable people being targeted are voluntary members of the Labour Party, in many cases having given hours and hours, nay a lifetime, of their free time for no remuneration whatsoever. Grrr indeed.
I wrote to Sir Keith and his deputy,Ms Rayner about my nonrenewal of membership. Bated breath until reply…
Joseph, I do hope you don’t die of asphyxia. Please share if you should get a reply.
Julia. From the age of 30, until retirement 7 years ago, my work was in/with the voluntary sector [paid staff managing, unpaid/volunteers assisting; also managing 2 Volunteer Bureau via staff]. The key difference between paid staff [e.g. LP] and volunteers [i.e. LP *footsoldiers*] is that volunteers can walk away, with no loss of income. The LP apparatchiks, presently, do not seem to understand that [or if they do, they don’t care ~ looking for wealthy individuals to bail the LP out]. Certainly, I have never seen volunteers treated so appallingly ~ without even common courtesy. Suspended for nearly a year; at subs renewal time I decided to walk away [compounded by my proud, Black African partner, herself from a Biafran genocide escapee family, facing 4 *draft charges*, for daring to allude to the Maafa (Black Holocaust)].