Meanwhile in the Labour Party...

[Sheilbh]

Edit: And Long-Bailey's tweeted her statement:

1.Today I retweeted an interview that my constituent and stalwart Labour Party supporter Maxine Peake gave to the Independent. Its main thrust was anger with the Conservative Government's handling of the current emergency and a call for Labour Party unity.
2.These are sentiments are shared by everyone in our movement and millions of people in our country. I learned that many people were concerned by references to international sharing of training and restraint techniques between police and security forces.
3.In no way was my retweet an intention to endorse every part of that article.
4.I wished to acknowledge these concerns and duly issued a clarification of my retweet, with the wording agreed in advance by the Labour Party Leader's Office, but after posting I was subsequently instructed to take both this agreed clarification and my original retweet down.
5.I could not do this in good conscience without the issuing of a press statement of clarification. I had asked to discuss these matters with Keir before agreeing what further action to take, but sadly he had already made his decision.
6.I am proud of the policies we have developed within the party from our Green Industrial Revolution to a National Education Service and I will never stop working for the change our communities need to see.
7.I am clear that I shall continue to support the Labour Party in Parliament under Keir Starmer's leadership, to represent the people of Salford and Eccles and work towards a more equal, peaceful and sustainable world.

And the party are apparently disputing point 4 on her statement. They say they spent several hours trying to convince her to take down the original tweet, but she refused to do so (and her apology didn't identify which bits of the interview she disagreed with). After that Starmer apparently felt he had no choice, though it is very helpful for him.

[Gups]

Solid raw politics. Tells shadow cabinet that he's in charge. Gets rid of a pretty crappy Corbynite. Tells the country that he's determined to get rid of anti-semitism in the party. Contrasts himself with Boris who wil stick to any of his friends no matter how toxic. Gets the Corbynite twitterati to melt down and hopefully fuck off.

Been a while since I voted Labour but I can see my way back.

[Richard Hakluyt]

+1

[Richard Hakluyt]

There is pressure on Starmer to reinstate her :

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53187789

A bad mistake if he does I think.

[garbon]

There is pressure on Starmer to reinstate her :

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53187789

A bad mistake if he does I think.

If were to, he might as well resign.

[Sheilbh]

There is pressure on Starmer to reinstate her :

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53187789

A bad mistake if he does I think.

He won't. This demonstrates how little the hard left matter now - amazing how quick and how far they've fallen. I think Momentum have launched a petition and in over 24 hours it's managed to get about 10k signatures.

At their peak they'd be able to get well over 100k on issues. Truth is the the appetite for long, grinding factional fights are very low and most Labour voters and members will just be thrilled at the leader doing well in the polls and at PMQs regularly and the party doing well in the polls.

[garbon]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/uk-politics-news-live-rebecca-long-bailey-keir-starmer-labour-boris-johnson-jenrick-a9586676.html

Starmer says meeting with left-wing Labour MPs was 'constructive' but did not change his mind

Sir Keir Starmer has commented on his meeting with left-wing Labour MPs today over the sacking of Rebecca Long-Bailey, saying the conversation had not changed his opinion on the matter.

The Labour leader said his meeting with the Socialist Campaign Group was "constructive and the tone was absolutely right" but it had ended in disagreement.

"We engaged for about an hour in discussion but my mind is made up on this. I took my decision yesterday and put my statement out yesterday," Sir Keir said.

The Campaign group said in its own statement that there was "significant disagreement" about Ms Long-Bailey's sacking but noted the conversation had taken place in a "mutually respectful manner."

[Sheilbh]

Now Shadow Environment Minister Lloyd Russel-Moyle has been out saying that JK Rowling was "using her own sexual assault" to justify her trans comments. He's also a Corbynite who may go.

I feel like we should be able to simultaneously sympathise with JK Rowling over her assault and take issue with her comments. Those are separate issues.

In other news Starmer now leads in the polls. I believe this is the first time* a Labour leader's been ahead on this question since Gordon Brown, 13 years ago

Which, if any, of the following people do you think would be the best prime minister?

Keir Starmer: 37% (+3)
Boris Johnson: 35% (=)

(*There was one poll in early 2019 when 18% preferred Jeremy Corbyn over 17% for Theresa May, but both were over-shadowed by the 57% who chose "none of the above" )

The Tories are still ahead in the polls and in the which party would you trust to govern polls. But Starmer's now in the position that Johnson's been in, and that Cameron and Blair had where he is ahead of his party.

[garbon]

I think he's right but foolish to say.

[Tamas]

I am hoping (probably in vain) that Starmer's and Biden's leads in the polls indicate that people are (for the 102900th time in history) are realising that a big mouth is not enough to manage a country, especially in a crisis.

[Richard Hakluyt]

I think that Trump and Johnson rely on white, male and hetero privilege for much of their support, it is a reaction to the way that the world is changing. But the secular trends are against them as our societies become more pluralist and complicated. Once we have come to the end of this reactionary phase then we can hopefully move on. I think/hope that once the Republicans and the Tories have been defeated at the ballot box they will be out of power for 10+ years and will only return after they have accepted the modern world.

[Josquius]

And hopefully labour will take their time in power to do the right thing and make the UK a democracy.

Now Shadow Environment Minister Lloyd Russel-Moyle has been out saying that JK Rowling was "using her own sexual assault" to justify her trans comments. He's also a Corbynite who may go.

I would agree with this.
Full sympathy for her with the assault et al. But, her timing in bringing it up right when she was under fire for transphobia... It did stink.
Of course pointing this out as a politician may not be the wisest move.

[Sheilbh]

Unite, a large union headed by Len McCluskey who is a big Corbynite (but has had an interesting journey, he was previously very close to Tom Watson and the Brownite wing) has announced they'll cut their funding to Labour by 10%. They are one of the party's largest donors. They've also basically issued a warning that if Starmer moves any further away from the left then they'll probably cut funding more.

All of which is fine/normal. But I think the issues they've chosen this over are pretty disappointing. There were a group of whistleblowers in the Labour Party who appeared on Panorama with allegations of anti-semitism and mishandling of complaints etc in Labour HQ. This ended up leading to a dispute in the employment courts which would have resulted in lots of probably quite uncomfortable evidence coming out. One of Starmer's first decisions was to settle the cases and issue an apology to the whistleblowers. This has become a bit of a bugbear on the left because they say that Labour's legal advice was that they'd win and instead the whistleblowers as part of a culture of almost sabotage in Labour HQ - staffers who wanted Corbyn to fail and could not reconcile themselves to a left Labour Party. Obviously there's more to a court case than whether you win or lose - for example you might want to settle, even if you've got a good case, to avoid the slow-drip of revelations in evidence is particularly damaging for a political party.

But it just feels a bit disappointing/typical of the left that the issue they've decided to focus on is anti-semitism and internal party management. It's also kind of frustrating to see a union so annoyed at settling an employment case against whistleblowers. Unite's line is that it is an abuse of their members' money and opens Labour to other lawsuits. It's worth noting that Unite have spent over £1million defending (and losing)  a libel case by a former Labour MP - which arguably is more of an abuse of members' money than just settling (or, maybe, not libelling people/suing whistleblowers ).

[Sheilbh]

Quite the day in the Labour Party. The Equalities and Human Rights Commission issued their report and found the Labour Party was in breach of equalities legislation:

Labour responsible for harassment and discrimination, EHRC antisemitism inquiry finds

Equality and Human Rights Commission report says party responsible for three breaches of Equality Act
Peter Walker
@peterwalker99

Thu 29 Oct 2020 10.50 GMT
First published on Thu 29 Oct 2020 10.06 GMT

The Labour party has been found to be responsible for unlawful acts of harassment and discrimination over antisemitism in the party, following an investigation by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC).

In a long-awaited report, the EHRC said there were "serious failings in the Labour party leadership in addressing antisemitism and an inadequate process for handling antisemitism complaints".

It said Labour under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn was responsible for three breaches of the Equality Act, connected to harassment, political interference in antisemitism complaints and inadequate training for those handling the complaints.

The inquiry found that antisemitic comments by Ken Livingstone, the former London mayor; and Pam Bromley, a councillor in Rossendale, Lancashire, amounted to harassment of Jewish members under law, and this was "only the tip of the iceberg" of such behaviour.

The EHRC uncovered what it said was inappropriate interference in the complaints process over antisemitism by staff from Corbyn's office, with 23 instances found, including staff exerting influence on decisions on areas such as member suspensions or whether to investigate claims. Some of these decision were made "because of likely press interest rather than any formal criteria", it said.

While there was a wider culture of political interference in certain complaints, the report said this occurred more often in antisemitism cases, and was thus found to be discriminatory and unlawful.

In response, three of the UK's main Jewish organisations – the Board of Deputies of British Jews, the Jewish Leadership Council and the Community Security Trust – said in a joint statement that the EHRC's findings were "a damning verdict on what Labour did to Jews under Jeremy Corbyn and his allies".

Citing examples of poor practice in dealing with complaints about antisemitism, the EHRC said an email inbox for these "was largely left unmonitored for a number of years and no action taken on the majority of complaints forwarded to it". Of 70 files reviewed for the inquiry, 62 had records missing.

The inquiry found that this element of indirect discrimination against Jewish members – the lack of a proper complaints and disciplinary procedure – lasted until August 2020, four months into Keir Starmer's tenure, but was now being addressed.

The report details comments by Livingstone and Bromley that it says amounted to unlawful harassment, because they were found to have antisemitic themes or suggested complaints about antisemitism were faked or smears.

It notes that Bromley made repeated Facebook posts with antisemitic themes, for example defending references to the Rothschild banking group, and complaining about a "fog of fake accusations of antisemitism" and calling herself the victim of a "witch-hunt".

Complaints were made about her in May 2017, but Bromley was only suspended from the party in April 2018, a day after an article in the Times about her comments.

On Livingstone and Bromley, the report says: "As these people were acting as agents of the Labour party, the Labour party was legally responsible for their conduct. In each case, the EHRC considered the perception of those affected by the conduct, and Labour party members told the EHRC that the comments contributed to a hostile environment for Jewish and non-Jewish members."

The EHRC said these two cases were "only the tip of the iceberg", with 18 other instances where there was not enough evidence for a legal conclusion that the party was responsible for the conduct, covering councillors, candidates and constituency party officials.

It said there were "many more files" showing evidence of antisemitic conduct by a member who did not have a party role, meaning Labour could not be deemed responsible for them.

The report makes 11 recommendations, including an independent complaints process and clearer rules, an acknowledgement of the prior political interference, and proper training for those involved in handling complaints.

The joint statement from the three Jewish groups said the report "proves why British Jews were so distressed and it disgraces those who attacked us for speaking out against anti-Jewish racism".

The Jewish Labour Movement, which was among the groups that referred the party to the EHRC, said blame for what happened "lies firmly with those who held positions of leadership – those who possessed both power and influence to prevent the growth of anti-Jewish racism".

It said: "Antisemitism within the Labour party had serious consequences for many people, causing real emotional pain and despair to those who have given their lives to the Labour party. As the EHRC points out, it undermines confidence in our politics and the fabric of our democracy.

"It will now be for the Labour party to set out how they intend to eradicate anti-Jewish racism from our party. This will in part be achieved by implementing the legally binding actions set out of the EHRC's report in full and without delay.

Gideon Falter, the chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism, said: "The EHRC's report utterly vindicates Britain's Jews, who were accused of lying and exaggerating, acting as agents of another country and using their religion to 'smear' the Labour party."

Caroline Waters, the interim chair of the EHRC, said: "The Labour party made a commitment to zero tolerance for antisemitism. Our investigation has highlighted multiple areas where its approach and leadership to tackling antisemitism was insufficient. This is inexcusable and appeared to be a result of a lack of willingness to tackle antisemitism rather than an inability to do so."

The review was launched in 2019 after party whistleblowers alleged that Labour was institutionally antisemitic in its handling of complaints, and within local party structures.

Starmer subsequently said it was a day of shame for the Labour Party and people who reject the report or oppose fixing this issue have no place in the Labour Party. Inevitably Corbyn did just that, noting that "one antisemite is one too many, but the scale of the problem was also dramatically overstated for political reasons by our opponents inside and outside the party, as well as by much of the media. That combination hurt Jewish people and must never be repeated."

Starmer has now suspended Corbyn from the Labour Party and removed the whip.

Edit: Needless to say this will cause a massive fight within the party (a bit like the 80s) but is proper detoxification. I always felt there was a fairly high risk that Corbyn would say or do something that would probably require the leadership to suspend him. I didn't expect it would only take six months.

Edit: Also I suspect Starmer's been on the lookout for a "blood on the carpet" moment to show voters how he's changed the party and Corbyn has been very obliging to provide one like this.

[Josquius]

Corbyn has a point. Totally the wrong time to say it of course but it's definitely fair to say the tories have far greater problems with unchecked racism yet the media focused on labours struggles to tackle it.