Labour’s ruling committee is racist – the evidence is undeniable

Jeremy Corbyn: As a lifelong campaigner against racism, how does Labour’s leader feel about being included in support of the racist abuse of another Labour Party member, because he is on the party’s National Executive Committee?

We all learned one thing from my “disciplinary” hearing with the Labour Party: I am not an anti-Semite.

I know the panel from Labour’s National Constitutional Committee ruled otherwise, but the decision ran contrary to all the factual evidence that was heard; it was a kangaroo court in which facts didn’t matter and justice was a joke.

And the evidence clearly showed that Labour’s ruling National Executive Committee had descended to supporting racism in order to throw me out of the party.

I should make it clear, at this point, that I am crowdfunding to take court action against those who have made false accusations of anti-Semitism against me. Please contribute – visit my JustGiving page and pledging to donate as much as you can spare.

Here’s the evidence:

The NEC had prepared the case against me, which included seven “particulars” of the charge. One of these ran as follows:

“On 12th October 2016 Mr Sivier posted [about accusations of anti-Semitism against Jackie Walker]: ‘She was subjected to racist abuse by people who pose as campaigners against racism (albeit that very specific kind of racism that relates to the Jewish people). The same people claim the Nazi holocaust exclusively for Jews, thereby discriminating against all the other groups who faced genocide at the same time.’

“This comment is grossly offensive to those the Party seeks to represent particularly the Jewish community. Comments like these have had and continue to have a serious impact on the Party’s position as an inclusive organisation, which stands against antisemitism.

“Qualifying racism in this way Mr Sivier has done is dismissive of antisemitism. There are very few, if any campaigners who ‘claim the Nazi holocaust exclusively for Jews‘. Stating this discredits and diminishes antisemitism and the work done by campaigners. To do so is a completely unacceptable way to engage in political debate and falls significantly below the standards expected of party members. This is clearly prejudicial and/or grossly detrimental to the party.”

I think what’s “grossly offensive to those the Party seeks to represent” is the support for racism in this charge.

I stated that Ms Walker was subjected to racist abuse. In attacking me for raising that fact, the NEC clearly supports the racists who abused Ms Walker.

But the NCC panel, chaired by Maggie Cousins, who I understand to be a hard-right supporter of the Zionist lobby within the Labour Party, did its utmost to stifle evidence to this effect.

In my questions, I asked: “This refers to the racist abuse suffered by Jackie Walker, who has also been accused of anti-Semitism by the Labour Party. Does the NEC agree, on the evidence available, that her abusers are racists?”

Ms Cousins interrupted before the Presenter could answer, claiming that it was “not appropriate” to discuss another case as members of the panel may be due to hear it as well as this. But when I asked the obvious question – “are they?” – the answer was no. So I carried on.

“Does the NEC believe it is appropriate for the Labour Party to support the behaviour of racists in the manner we see here?”

The Presenter was not a member of the NEC and was therefore unqualified to comment on the NEC’s beliefs. Then she was not qualified to present the case, surely?

And so it went.

“Does the NEC accept that in saying this comment is “grossly offensive to those the party seeks to represent”, it is suggesting that the Party seeks to represent racists?”

She couldn’t answer for the NEC.

“Does the NEC accept that in supporting the racist abuse of a person who self-identifies as Jewish, it is undermining its own claim that the Labour Party “seeks to represent the Jewish community”?

She couldn’t answer for the NEC.

These are questions that should be answered, though.

The racism – and the support of racism – implied in the accusation against me is clear.

In making such an accusation against me, Labour’s ruling organisation was declaring its support for racists.

In declaring support for racists, Labour’s ruling organisation was admitting racism itself.

And, as the case was presented by the NEC, all members of that committee must take responsibility for the racism seen here.

That includes Jeremy Corbyn.

Given his own long-standing opposition to racism in all its forms, I wonder how he feels about being included in support of racism and racist abusers, against his will?

Visit our JustGiving page to help Vox Political’s Mike Sivier fight anti-Semitism libels in court

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:



  1. jaynel62 November 15, 2018 at 2:15 pm - Reply

    I love your closing comment re Corbyn, this is precisely how I feel as a Party member. As a life long anti-discrimination campaigner I currently feel Dirty about this matter.
    Stay Strong Mike many of us beleive in you xx

    • Mike Sivier November 15, 2018 at 9:13 pm - Reply

      I have to say I found the way the disciplinary hearing was run to be utterly shocking. In a proper court, if the chair of the magistrates behaved in the way Ms Cousins did, they would have been admonished by the clerk in the strongest possible terms.
      Labour must reform, before too much damage is done. It’s possible too much has been done already.

  2. jill Phillips November 15, 2018 at 7:10 pm - Reply

    Hi Mike, What you’re saying definitely needs to be said – loud and very clear. But not – really not – at this particularly vulnerable moment. ONLY once we WIN will the Truth become unassailable; will it be discussed; in the OPEN: ALWAYS. The Media will have to reform Big Time. But we have to stop giving them red meat. They’re psychological cannibals.

    • Mike Sivier November 15, 2018 at 9:07 pm - Reply

      Then Labour should have had a little more sense. I can’t help the fact that this happened now. This is the perfect time to raise this issue, precisely because of what is happening at this “particularly vulnerable moment”. The people in the Labour Party who think they can prey on innocent members with impunity need to see that there are always consequences. Sorry if it creates difficulty for the party as a whole but that is not my problem.

  3. jill Phillips November 16, 2018 at 8:29 am - Reply

    Yes. I agree with everything you say; indeed, Labour should have had a great deal more sense in being lumbered with an ill-selected few being accepted in a powerfully manipulating position.
    Except – your being “sorry that it ‘creates difficulty for the party as a whole is not your problem”. I think it is.
    You – as well as those Members of the Party who have been backing you up all the way, are part of the very ‘whole’ for whom continuing this argument at this very moment is ill-judged.
    There are times when the Party must come first. There’s lots of (much better) times ahead when – and with full support – individuals might choose to come second.

    • Mike Sivier November 16, 2018 at 9:51 am - Reply

      Not when the party has individuals of the kind we have been discussing in positions of power. They will ruin the situation for everybody.

Leave A Comment