McCluskey attacks Tom Watson: More lies from the #ZombieChickenCoup?
Tom Watson lied about the collapse of talks between the Labour leadership, the unions and the rebels in the Parliamentary Labour Party, it seems.
Readers of This Blog may be unsurprised at the revelations, as many people have been complaining about Mr Watson’s lacklustre performance in keeping party discipline (which is part of his job description) for some time.
Watson said earlier today that a statement by Jeremy Corbyn that he would remain as leader meant there was no point in continuing the talks, but Mr McCluskey makes it clear in his statement that “Jeremy Corbyn’s resignation as the Leader was not on the agenda.”
He continues: “Mr Watson knew that, and it is entirely wrong to suggest that any public statement by Jeremy represented any change in the situation. This is a deeply disingenuous manoeuvre.”
What can we conclude from this? That the Labour mutineers’ agreement to go into talks was never genuine? That they – and Tom Watson – were merely stalling in order to put elements in place for a leadership challenge? That we have a few more lies to add to the list of shame that has been run up by the mutineers since June 26?
That Tom Watson’s position as deputy leader of the Labour Party is now untenable because he has been derelict in his duty, and he should resign or be sacked?
Here’s Mr McCluskey’s statement in full:
The leader of Britain’s biggest trade union has attacked a decision by Tom Watson to call off a meeting between Jeremy Corbyn supporters and rebelling MPs as an “act of sabotage” against the Labour party.
Len McCluskey, general secretary of Unite, said a workable plan to resolve bitter differences between the Labour leader and the parliamentary Labour party had “never been closer”.
Watson announced that a planned meeting on Sunday with McCluskey and other leading Labour figures would not go ahead, prompting a leadership challenge from Angela Eagle and a vow from Corbyn to fight any moves against his position.
The Labour leader’s spokesman said it was “disappointing” that Watson had walked away from the union-brokered talks, which were attempting to end the impasse between the embattled Corbyn and his MPs.
Source: Len McCluskey attacks Tom Watson for pulling out of Labour talks | Politics | The Guardian
ADVERT
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
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!
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:
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.
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:
Has *any* public statement by the Red Tories that you can think of throughout this unending farce proven true as yet?
I can’t think of one off the top of my head.
Have you seen transcripts or heard recording in respect to what was said? How do you know the Mr McCluskey isn’t lying and Tom Watson telling the truth? While I realise that this is only an individual’s blog and so not really subject to the usual standards of journalism expected in the media, you coverage of the Labour party’s apparent self-destruction does seem, shall we say, slightly biased and not wholly scrupulous in respect to possibilities and facts. A senior reporter on BBC News yesterday alleged that McClusky WAS trying to persuade Corbyn to go “no matter what he has said elsewhere”, not that this will cuts any ice with you, Mike, as you seem these days to have convinced yourself that the beeb is a propagandist mouthpiece for the Conservative party and darker right-wing forces working against Labour and other forces of light.
Where’s the objectivity?
Fair dos.
For the record, I am a journalist of more than 20 years’ standing and my blog adheres to extremely high standards.
Having published Tom Watson’s claims, Mr McCluskey is entirely entitled to tell his side of the story.
As the conditions of the talks are not under any bond of secrecy, it is entirely possible that they may be made public, so it is not in Mr McCluskey’s interests to tell a falsehood.
Not suprised really.Eagle and Tom watson has done this before to Richard Burgeon, and also to Lol Duffy.
They think the party is there’s and dare any one say anything different, They want a resignation.
I am bitterly disappointed in Tom Watson for his deliberately misleading remarks in an attempt to misrepresent the Union’s support for Corbyn.
As for the BBC propagandist tools, words fail me, that corporation is just so corrupt the list of sometimes silly attempts at misrepresentation are beyond description and too numerous to start listing.
Keep up the good work.