Why is supine Starmer spending Labour money appeasing opponents in anti-Semitism case?
Keir the clueless: if he won’t stand up against liars who present a false impression of the Labour Party, then his version of Labour is not worth your support in any way at all.
It seems Keir Starmer is set to pay out Labour members’ subscriptions and apologise to so-called anti-Semitism whistleblowers, in order to settle a court case that Labour would win – if he fought it.
Why?
What is the aim here, other than to humiliate the party and create a false impression that Labour was in the wrong?
Here’s the story:
Labour is poised to make a formal apology to antisemitism whistleblowers as part of a settlement designed to draw a line under allegations made during the Jeremy Corbyn era, the Guardian has learned.
The whistleblowers sued the party for defamation in the wake of a BBC Panorama investigation last year. No final settlement has been reached but sources said an agreement was imminent, prompting anger from Corbyn allies who accused the Labour leader, Keir Starmer, of capitulating.
Seven of the eight whistleblowers – all former Labour staffers – who featured in the documentary instructed the prominent media lawyer Mark Lewis to take action against the party.
They claimed senior figures had issued statements attacking their reputations and suggesting they had ulterior political and personal motives to undermine the party.
Labour is expected to settle a separate case with the veteran journalist John Ware, who led the Panorama investigation and who sued over a statement by Labour that the BBC had engaged in “deliberate and malicious representations designed to mislead the public” in its broadcast.
If they were justified in their action, then perhaps it would be fair for them to receive an apology and restitution. However:
Any apology will prove controversial among Corbyn loyalists, who questioned whether settling it is a good use of party funds. The Guardian understands legal advice provided to Labour under Corbyn’s leadership suggested the party could win the case.
Labour under Starmer has appeared eager to reach agreements to end ongoing conflicts over the party’s antisemitism crisis.
So on the face of it, Starmer is throwing Labour members’ subscription money away, in order to lie about the way anti-Semitism was handled by these former officers.
And it will be for nothing. Appeasement never stops anybody – it just encourages them to go on accusing and demanding, with each demand being more outrageous.
What impression is Starmer hoping to give?
That Labour is now utterly supine?
That the party will give in and go along with anyone who tries to bully it – like the Tories on the Covid-19 crisis and the sectarian groups among the UK’s Jewish community who demand absolute loyalty to the Israeli government, no matter what atrocities it commits against Palestine?
That Labour is no longer an anti-racist party as it will not defend even its own members who stand up against racism?
That Labour is no longer worthy of support in any way at all?
Source: Labour set to apologise to antisemitism whistleblowers | Politics | The Guardian
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
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:
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 https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com
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:
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:
All these claims and counter-claims need testing in a court of law not settled in secretive closed door meetings.
There is a lot of evidence that seems to demonstrate the people involved have been somewhat economical with the truth. i.e. Leaked emails, Leaked anti-semitism report
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lobby_(TV_series) documentary and evidence showing the BBC Panorama documentary was inaccurate.
Labour should be sued if they fail to insist on this.
I for one resent my subscription money being used like this with no proper democratic oversight and I suspect many other members feel the same.
Yes, they should be tested in court. Starmer’s action is clearly about keeping them out of court. That in itself – coming from a lawyer – is suspect, is it not?
Not what most people would understand as a forensic approach to this problem?
“… I for one resent my subscription money being used like this … ”
As a disabled elderly person who is NOT a party member and yet campaigned in a marginal in the rain for them last election, I wrote to ask they return the over £100 that I had donated for their election campaign because of their negligence in employing people who actively worked against their own election! ‘Not even the courtesy of a reply or apology! I’m done with them, no apology!
Good point – We had spontaneous donations to LP from non-members in good faith when canvassing at last election. Shouldn’t think they would be too happy if they realised how that money was misused.