On conducting a united left NEC campaign
Statements are circulating on social media advising that Momentum has reversed its decision to support the Grassroots5 slate for the Labour Party’s National Executive Committee elections which includes JVL member, Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi. We deeply regret Momentum’s decision to separate itself in this way from the united position which virtually all other left organisations have committed to.
As a candidate, Naomi has been asked by several interest groups to declare her position on a number of issues that are not consensual in our movement, nor within the coalition of 13 organisations backing Grassroots5. She has been asked to state her view on Proportional Representation, was asked by an individual to express support for the aims of Labour Women’s Declaration and to sign a written commitment drafted by Momentum on gender self-ID.
JVL’s position as part of the G5 coalition is that it is not helpful for candidates to sign statements or answer questionnaires during an election, that have not been agreed by the groups collectively.
We are all agreed on fundamental principles to do with freedom of expression, democracy and human rights, international solidarity, equality, working class liberation and an end to all forms of discrimination against people for being who they are. We are not all agreed on the details of how that liberation is to be achieved.
This is what we have said to those who requested a policy commitment in each of the above cases.
This is not to accept or reject the views expressed by those approaching us or our candidate – simply to explain that it would require agreement by JVL and the other G5 coalition members for us to do so. Some of these views relate to complex, nuanced subjects that require extended reflection and respectful debate – something that cannot realistically occur in the heat of an election campaign.
Naomi will be pleased if she can contribute to creating an atmosphere within our movement that will facilitate such reflection and debate in the longer term. If elected to the NEC, she would hope to have productive discussions with like-minded CLP, TU and other NEC representatives, developing principled positions on issues as they arise in consultation with the supporting groups.
Meanwhile we ask comrades to understand that Naomi is not in a position to act independently of the key groups supporting the slate.
Our goal is to bring members together around issues that unite us, not to split over those that could divide us.
Naomi’s, and our, priority is to mobilise with allies in the party to win the greatest possible number of seats for the left on the NEC. We urge all groups and individuals who share this goal to get behind the Grassroots5 candidates – Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi, Gemma Bolton, Yasmine Dar, Mish Rahman and Jess Barnard.
See these links for up to date information on how to support the G5 campaign and cast your votes in the ballot. (Note the party has announced a delay in the start of voting which is now likely to begin in the week commencing August 1).
JVL issued this statement in response to this rather strange justification that Momentum circulated to certain of its key activists. Their message sought to explain why they reversed their decision to support the unified lest slate that has the best chance of securing a strong left-wing presence on the NEC.
We recognise and salute the good work that Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi has done standing up for Palestinian rights and defending the rights of Jewish people to hold anti-Zionist positions.
It was because of this that on Saturday the NCG initially voted to endorse Naomi for the NEC election. It was also agreed that Naomi be contacted to discuss concerns that had been raised in that meeting relating to trans rights. These concerns arose from previous Left slate negotiations for Labour’s National Women’s Committee – which Naomi participated in – where the issue of self-ID became a sticking point: a candidate who was open about not supporting self-ID was strongly supported and in the end endorsed against Momentum’s wishes. As such Momentum could not support the full slate. Once elected, that candidate subsequently argued for these trans-exclusionary views publicly, before then quitting Labour.
Following Saturday’s NCG meeting, Momentum attempted to approach Naomi to discuss this and get a firm guarantee in writing of a commitment to trans rights, so we could assure key stakeholders, including trans socialists and other candidates, that all those we endorse fully support the rights of trans people to self-identify their gender.
Naomi declined a direct meeting and her representatives were unable to provide a guarantee that Naomi supports self-ID. As such an emergency meeting of the NCG was called and a democratic vote to withdraw the endorsement passed.
We make no claim as to what views Naomi does or does not hold, but in light of our concerns remaining unaddressed, we could not in good faith maintain our endorsement.
This is not an abstract issue. For years there has been a concerted attempt to marginalise trans people and exclude them from public life, now reaching a horrifying crescendo in the Tory leadership contest. This consensus against trans people stretches from the liberal to the right-wing press and, shamefully, from the Tory Party to the upper echelons of Labour, as Momentum has condemned in recent weeks. The next NEC will have a role in approving the next Labour Party manifesto. It is critical, therefore, that our candidates are open and firm in their commitments to the rights of trans people.
Momentum’s approach to the issue of candidate endorsements and what we expect of candidates may differ from other organisations in the CLGA and we do not intend to make this a point of conflict in this election. These organisations remain our allies – and we look forward to continuing our work with them to build socialism in Britain and beyond.
N.B. As standard practice we do not usually disclose the details of negotiations for slates, but due to the briefing against Momentum and the misleading version of events provided we felt clarity on this issue was vital.
It’s a funny old thing but this idea of 10 pledges has already been made a mockery of by the silent knight in his 2020 leadership campaign. Oh the knots they got tied into when that arbiter of revolutionary activity, the BOD presented its 10 pledges, immediately followed by attempts to rope the candidates into the TERF wars, were painful to behold.
I issued a statement on my FB page yesterday urging all my friends to support Naomi. I was not privy to any of the information above and frankly I don’t care.
Neither really to I care that much about Schmomentum, which has seen itself joining JLM campaigns against “antisemitism” in the party, has a co-chair and many leading activists who think the EU is a progressive organisation and actively supported Starmer for the leadership. Sometimes its positions are indiscernible from those of the AWL or Nuke Akehurst.
For me, Naomi is a principled socialist fighter whom I am glad to support. I imagine she is also a feminist, which is how I would describe myself, and a true internationalist.
If she has become a target of sectarians, more power to her elbow. We are better off without them.
Go sister Naomi, hasta la victoria siempre.
I don’t see why Momentum appears to be conflating disagreement with self-id of gender identity with marginalising trans people and excluding them from public life. Why should a trans person’s- or indeed anyone’s- role in public life be anything to do with their gender identity? Neither do I understand why Momentum appears determined to sabotage the chances of a Left slate. Clearly, they have a reason for both (excepting the excuse of stupidity). Momentum is a spent force for the Left- if, indeed, it ever was for the Left.
And thus we see how damaging identity politics have become when what we have is the claims of trans rights activists pitted against those of feminists. The question of self ID should never have been allowed to become a litmus test for the left.
You can oppose the idea that all a man need to do is declare himself a woman to become one and still be a supporter of trans rights. By what process of political alchemy has opposition to self-ID or the idea that a trans woman is a woman biologically meant that one is opposed to = rights for trans people and against discrimination?
To be honest I was surprised Momentum, given its lamentable history over the question of the ‘anti-Semitism’ purges had endorsed her to begin with and I suspect the real reasons for their decision have not been stated.
Well said JVL. You can send on me to advocate for this unifying line. There are some who support democratic progress, who will not agree with you. I do agree with your proposals and will support your proposed line of action.
Shocking treatment of Naomi. I’ve trawled through momentum stuff and nowhere can I find a declaration that it supports self-ID. So what is this decision based on? There’s been no consultation of momentum membership as far as I’m aware. Perhaps momentum is unaware of the hashtag #LabourLosingWomen. If they persist with the self-ID line there’ll soon be another, #MomentumLosingWomen, which I shall promote vigorously, and will cancel my subscription. I’m hesitating about voting for Jess Barnard – I thought she was great until discovering that she’s a passionate supporter of self ID. I hate the thought of not voting for a young, keen leftist, but for me and many labour women this issue is so profound, the outcomes so dangerous, that it’s a priority. We’ve been forced into this position.
(And would like to take this opportunity to thank you, Esther, for your contribution to the Red Line TV debate which I found otherwise heavily weighted on the other side!)
The wider issue here is whether anyone should care what Momentum says or does. It is – and has always been – the self-appointed vanguard of the left, able to steamroller all other views without debate or even discussion.
There is no one organisation that can claim to speak for the left and Momentum has massively declined in both numbers and credibility since its high point. My view is that they should just be ignored and allowed to wither away to total irrelevance. If they don’t want to co-operate with other groups, let’s see how they do on their own!
JVL’s position on this is absolutely right for the reasons they give.
Our CLP noiminated the GR-5.
There are those who are using “false-flag” arguments of gender politics to try to draw support away from Naomi.
She is a courageous, principled socialist.
Those using these spurious reasons of gender politics are doing the work of the right-wing factionlists.
We can spend hours debating how many seraphims can stand on the head of a pin – a debate that will exhaust our resources, lead to nowhere and will not deliver socialism.
Solidarity with Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi !
Frankly I get the feeling that there will always be someone somewhere trying to sabotage decency & justice, especially if it has left wing, socialist views!
The Momentum group now appear to have become the Right Wing supporters using trans & self ID as the main issue. It is not.
Naomi has been slated by the Starmer Party.
As for Momentum’s fight for self ID, this issue is complicated, & difficult for many to comprehend. People need time to understand what it means & its implications.
Shoving this into people’s faces is unfair at this time when they don’t even understand why people are being expelled from Labour using fake claims & accusations.
The main issue is getting Naomi elected on the NEC.
Throwing a spanner in the works sounds like a thing the tool maker’s son would do.
I cannot trust Momentum. Labour has NO RESEMBLANCE to a Democratic Socialist Party anymore. Starmer being our MP here will NEVER get our vote for anything ever again.
Let’s get Naomi in. At least she is trustworthy & has experience.
I will keep it brief:To me momentum’s stance does not make any sense and i find their demand that Naomi sign undertakings and such like offensive, oppressive as well as discriminatory.
My vote will go to the grassroots 5 and that includes Naomi.
It is not correct to say that Naomi has been formally asked to support the Labour Women’s Declaration (LWD), although someone may have asked this of her as an individual.
LWD is a campaign to support and defend women’s rights within the labour movement. It’s supporters are drawn from all wings of the Labour Party. LWD is interested in supporting individuals who understand and defend women’s sex-based rights: it does not lobby individuals for support.
Thank you for this clarification. It has not altered my own decision to vote for Naomi Wimbourne-Idrissi, because I think she will make an excellent addition to the LP NEC; but you provide coherent reasoning in a debate which many are trying to close down, to the detriment of democracy.
I think Momentum have become a tragically hilarious example of a tiny political echo-chamber. First, they decide that not agreeing with self-ID equals hounding trans people out of public life (which it doesn’t, not remotely) and then they get themselves all upset and wail that this terrible attitude they just invented stretches right across the press and the main political parties.
At no point does it dawn on them either a) that the reason disagreement with self-ID is so ubiquitous is that most people, once they’ve learned the legal and social consequences of it, disagree with it, or b) that there is absolutely no sign that Naomi does disagree with it, she’s just pointed out that it’s not her business to address that issue at this time. What a shame Momentum have a hand in the ‘left slate’.
Momentum need to stop conflating “trans rights” on the one hand, and commitment to a policy of “self id” on the other.
What has become painfully clear over recent months is that the Tories are ready and willing to exploit perceived confusion in the Labour position on sex and gender. The recent More in Common survey demonstrates that they are justified in seeing a potential wedge issue.
We need policy that clearly distinguishes between “sex” and “gender identity” and identifies areas – eg sports – where *sex* as opposed to “gender identity” is the relevant criteria. Momentum’s current approach is an impediment to that. We need NEC members who are equipped to identify and debate those areas where there is a conflict of intetest, in order to help formulate policy that fairly addresses the needs and interests of all parties. I wrote to each of the left slate candidates raising precisely these concerns and as yet, Naomi has been the only one to respond at all.
A colleague also wrote and while she received no response to her email, Jess Barnard did see fit to post a slightly disparaging tweet making a generalised reference.
I echo other commenters in lamenting the lost opportunity to support a keen young left wing candidate, but this is not a trifling matter that can just be ignored for the “greater cause”. I know that there are members of Momentum who take a much more constructive approach, and I hope that ultimately their position will win out.
As another commenter has said, we don’t need another #losingwomen in the Labour Party.
The previous candidate who received strong support from the CLGA for the National Women’s Committee that Mm are still on about is me. For having concerns about Self-ID, I was labelled as bigoted and transphobic, including by some of my slate-mates who had courted Momentum’s support and this othering, which started with Momentum but escalated into outright bullying and then abuse of the party’s disciplinary system over the course of the year that followed my election, resulted in my decision to leave the party altogether.
Having seen the appalling betrayal of anti-Zionist, Jewish party members and their supporters by the party and the capitulation of Momentum, I had wanted to leave for a long time but stayed to complete work I had begun on poverty as a local Labour Councillor and to complete my term on the Women’s Committee – this last one being something I had stepped up to at the behest of CLPD and which just became untenable due to the bullying from within the party, shamefully from those on the supposed left.
I had no platform and very little back-up from anyone. I had no feminist networks at that time. I came second despite their attempts to de-platform and censure me.
Mm had nothing whatsoever positive to say about my work on poverty or on social class (wonder why that might be) – at least they have been gracious about Naomi’s work on anti-Zionism but honestly, I think people are sick of being told what they can and can’t say and tired of seeing political representatives ducking and weaving on the sex/gender issue.
I agree with JVL’s sensible statement. For a start the NEC is not a policy making body so a candidate’s position on PR or whatever is irrelevant. What is vital is respect for the rights of members and CLPs.