Rolling in it: Boris Johnson has received enormous amounts in donations related to his work as a member of Parliament. But now, as prime minister, he complains about having to pay for his own food and that of four of his six children, while denying free school meals to people earning less than £6 per hour.
Sour grapes from the UK’s prime minister?
In this case it seems likely.
Boris Johnson was one of the 322 Conservative MPs who voted against free school meals for children whose families have fallen below the poverty line, either because of 10 years of Conservative-fuelled wage depression or because the Covid-19 crisis is forcing them to live on a fraction of their normal income.
His choice to starve poverty-stricken children came only weeks after it was revealed that he is “complaining about money” because he is having to use his £150,402 prime ministerial salary to feed himself, his paramour and four of his six children. At least his accommodation is provided by the state, though!
Was his vote fuelled by resentment?
Well, it is a possible interpretation. It doesn’t present the prime minister in a very good light but, if people complain when you mention this to them, just remind them that they voted for him.
Of course, Johnson does receive a certain number of donations from pro-Tory sources. These seem to have dried up since he became prime minister but I note from the register of members’ financial interests that he has received two “gift hampers” worth a total of £1,100, that he registered in May.
Could the contents of those not have helped him out?
And the £14,672 he has made from his various books since the current Parliament began last year should also ease the burden a little, This Writer would have thought.
Come to think of it, some of the money donated to him in previous years might come in handy, considering the huge amounts he received.
For example, in 2019 he received from polling and market research company CTF Partners Ltd, £3,000 and an interest-free loan of £20,000 for office and staffing costs.
From JC Bamford Excavators Ltd, of Uttoxeter (Constituency: Burton and Uttoxeter; MP: Kate Griffiths (Con)): £64,000.
From “general secondary education” firm RTC Education 2 Ltd (Constituency: Harrow West; MP: Gareth Thomas (Lab)): £10,000.
From First Corporate Shipping Ltd (trading as The Bristol Port Company) (Constituency: Cities of London and Westminster; MP: Nickie Aiken (Con)): £25,000.
From real estate trader Countywide Developments plc (Constituency: Warwick and Leamington; MP: Matt Western (Lab)): £10,000.
From bookkeepers MET Trading Ltd (Constituency: Leeds North East; MP: Fabian Hamilton (Lab)): £5,000
From investment firm Killik & Co LLP (Constituency: Cities of London and Westminster; MP: Nickie Aiken (Con)): £10,000.
From Audley Ltd (for whom Companies House failed to provide the nature of the business) (Constituency: Cities of London and Westminster; MP: Nickie Aiken (Con)): £5,000.
From “business support services” firm Albion Agencies Ltd (Constituency: Cities of London and Westminster; MP: Nickie Aiken (Con)): £5,000.
From Dow Investments plc (Constituency: Edinburgh North and Leith; MP: Deidre Brock (SNP)): £10,000.
And from private donors: an eye-watering £633,900!
And a prime minister who has recently received this kind of wealth begrudges free school meals to children whose parents are living on £5.80 an hour.
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.
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!
Still apt: Keir Starmer reckons he was named after original Labour leader Hardie – but can anyone doubt that his illustrious forerunner might have said these words, if confronted with evidence of Starmer’s abysmal performance? [I’m astonished to discover, after using the image on another article, that I need to clarify that he didn’t.]
Don’t get me wrong; it’s great that Labour Party members are challenging Keir Starmer over something.
And his failure to voice a coherent party policy on the people coming across the channel in dinghies – because they aren’t legally allowed to demand asylum in the UK without physically being here – is indeed shameful.
It seems the sticking-point for party members is that Starmer has criticised the government for incompetence in failing to carry out its own policy to deflect refugees away from the UK, because it is not Labour’s job to support the Tories in their cruelties.
And the protesters are right to point out that international law is clear: the migrants’ right to come to the UK for asylum is protected.
But there are so many other issues on which Starmer has disgraced himself – and brought Labour into disrepute.
Where is the party’s condemnation of Israeli’s bombing attack on Gaza, that has been ongoing for, I believe, 11 days by now?
Related to that, where is his apology to all the party members Labour has been persecuting with false allegations of anti-Semitism? This is linked to the party’s attitude to Israel because Labour under Starmer seems to think that opposition to that nation’s policies is the same as hatred of Jews – a clear fallacy.
Still on an ethnic theme, isn’t the Labour leader due a kicking over his frankly racist attitude to the Black Lives Matter campaign?
Or, going back to support for the Tories, why is he getting a free pass over his demand that schools must open again in September – in line with Boris Johnson’s own comments – when it is still not clear whether this is putting our children, and ourselves, in danger?
In fact it seems all-too-easy to challenge Keir Starmer over failings in his leadership.
Has he done anything that party members can wholeheartedly support?
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.
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!
The gossips have been flaying the skins off the jungle drums since we learned a Conservative MP has been arrested for rape.
Much of the chatter has centred on the suspect’s anonymity, which seems to have provoked a lot of confected outrage.
This Writer isn’t outraged by it.
I’ve been to an awful lot of court cases and I’m satisfied that when matters get that far, it is right for the defendant to be named. It is the victim’s identity that must be protected.
Matters haven’t got that far.
And accusations of rape are extremely serious, with major reputational harm attached.
So, until such time as Her Majesty launches a criminal prosecution against the MP involved, I don’t mind him remaining nameless.
Once she does, his identity should be allowed no protection at all – most particularly because he is a member of Parliament. We should expect a higher standard of behaviour from our representatives.
The other talking-point is more worrying.
People have been complaining because the suspected MP has not been suspended by the Conservative Party, in the same way that Labour members and representatives were suspended the instant they were accused.
Doesn’t this say more about Labour than the Tories, though?
Whether the chatterers like it or not, a UK citizen – no matter what the accusation against them – is innocent until proven guilty.
The Tories – for the time being, at least – are right to protect their MP from the (possibly-unwarranted) attacks that suspension would attract.
Conversely, what about Labour’s decision not only to suspend members who have been accused of anti-Semitism, but for the party actually to go out of its way to inform the media (as it did in my own case)?
That’s right – it is Labour that is at fault.
Or am I mistaken?
I suppose it depends whether you think being accused of anti-Semitism – harbouring personal opinions of hatred against Jewish people simply because they are Jewish – is to be accused of a worse crime than rape – a direct attack that violates the victim’s body and often (personally, I would say always) traumatises them for the rest of their life.
Let me know your opinions – and be sure to include your reasons for holding them.
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.
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!
For the fewer: it seems Keir Starmer’s decision to abandon traditional Labour policies for the discredited “centre” (actually right-wing) ground has triggered an exodus that will leave him in charge of a hollowed-out husk. Politics is moving away.
The resignations are coming thick and fast now – and publicly, thanks to the social media.
Keir Starmer’s bid to fool Labour Party members into thinking that he was any kind of socialist has failed utterly and members who joined to support Jeremy Corbyn are fleeing as he imposes his undemocratic, red-Tory vision on the party they loved.
People who served faithfully as party officers are advocating a new kind of “extra-Parliamentary Left” to fill the political void that Starmer is creating – at least until he and his cronies leave the once-great political organisation they seem determine to hollow out and suck dry.
Terina Hine, formerly Cities of London and Westminster CLP Secretary, explained her reasons for quitting on Counterfire:
Sir Keir Starmer became leader of the party promising to strengthen party unity and to respect and retain popular policies developed over the last five years. It is now clear that these promises are not going to be kept.
Labour under Starmer’s leadership will move to the right brutally and rapidly.
Labour has indicated it intends to move away from its environmental commitments, away from its close association with trade unions and once again away from its roots.
[Starmer’s] comments on the BLM movement show, at best, an embarrassing lack of understanding of the issues of entrenched racism in our society.
The imposition from the NEC of new election rules without resort to Conference, and the changes in policy direction, not least the newly adopted position on Kashmir in direct opposition to the resolution passed at Conference 2019, display disdain for party democracy.
Added to the lack of action taken over the racist and sexist abuse highlighted in the leaked report, not to mention the lack of action over those who actively worked against a Labour election victory, a clear picture emerges of a leadership more concerned with attacking the left within the party and wooing so-called “liberal conservative” voters than opposing [the UK’s] extreme rightwing government.
It has failed to hold the government to account over the worst crisis in my lifetime and consistently appears to be putting the interest of business over those of the workers
The failure of Labour to call for the sacking of Dominic Cummings was a truly shameful abrogation of the job of the opposition, while the victories won on schools and on children’s meal vouchers were both the result of pressure emanating from outside of Westminster rather than inside.
There are major struggles coming: mass unemployment, a global economic crisis and increased international tensions. But I believe the Labour Party in its current form will continue to capitulate and lean right.
Young people who have been cancelling their membership have been explaining their reasons on DazedDigital.com.
Here’s Leila, 22:
It doesn’t seem like Labour is interested in justice anymore. You can see that from Keir’s refusal to advocate for tenants, his support for the government on coronavirus, and through his lack of engagement with low-paid nurses and essential workers. It’s also obvious from Keir’s refusal to engage with the material demands of Black Lives Matter, and his playing to TERFs.
I left the party because of the Labour Leaks – I found the report extremely chilling, and the fact that the leadership has not launched an investigation into its findings is shameful. We live in a time of global revolution, and Labour has simply revealed itself to be on the side of the oppressor. It made me so angry when Keir Starmer and Angela Rayner took a knee in an empty conference room – who exactly are you taking a knee against? These are both people who wield a huge amount of power, and have the capacity to confront racism and anti-Blackness in their own party if they actually chose to. I’d rather redirect my funds to people who are actually working to address our society’s systemic oppressions.”
Here’s Patrick, 27:
Over the course of seven days, [Starmer] fired Rebecca Long-Bailey out of hand, challenged the prime minister to a press-ups challenge like a frat boy, and took the knee in solidarity with the knee, not the neck.
Keir also tried to reduce Black Lives Matter to a ‘moment’ and not a movement, which was at best incomprehensible ignorance, and at worst outright racism. His dismissal of the demands of BLM as ‘nonsense’ was insulting to the movement and the Black community, and all those who have pushed for structural reform to achieve equality. The idea that to win back the ‘traditional Labour heartlands’ you need to employ dogwhiste racism is a complete misreading of the situation, and entirely unacceptable.
Here’s Sinthia, 23:
My instincts to care about poor people, refugees, Black people, people of colour, and the LGBTQ+ community would not align with the values of a party which seeks to demonise them and use them as scapegoats, like the right wing does.
It’s so sad that the very real and valid battle with anti-semitism is being weaponised against people who speak up for Palestinian people.
Here’s Florence, 29:
The final straw for me was when Labour suggested that renters should be given a rent holiday rather than a rent suspension, which would mean they’d be racking up more debt to their landlords. I’m an active member of the London Renters Union, and since Labour made this statement, loads more people have reported that their landlords have suggested this when they’ve requested temporary rent reductions. So, Labour has helped enable this, which is going to cause even worse problems for renters further along the line.
Here’s Sophie, 22:
My distrust for the Labour Party began when the antisemitism report was leaked. As a Jewish person, I was completely shocked to find that certain party members purposely tried to make Labour lose the 2017 election, and purposely mishandled antisemitism claims in order to undermine Corbyn’s leadership. I was also disgusted at the racist treatment of Diane Abbott and other BAME MPs. Starmer enacted no action against the Labour officials named in the report.
The final straw came when Rebecca Long-Bailey was fired… The response was entirely disproportionate. Starmer’s response went against the IHRA definition of antisemitism, conflating zionism and antisemitism. This co-opting of antisemitism to justify ousting left wing members of parliament from the cabinet is disgraceful. The actions of Israel and the IDF are not to be conflated with the actions of Jewish people – this bastardisation of the label of antisemitism is actively harmful to Jews. I’ve experienced antisemitism first hand and I feel my experiences and being co-opted to silence critics of Israel.
And here’s Greg, 26:
I was pretty skeptical about the funding Starmer received from certain donors that were known to be supporters of Blairite politics and funders of anti-Corbyn groups, but this only came to light after the leadership election, which seemed like a tactic to avoid scrutiny.
Then the Labour leaks showed conversations between Labour members scheming against Corbyn in 2017, providing evidence that decisions were purposely made to fuel the antisemitism accusations and that money was funnelled to anti-Corbyn candidates within Labour. Starmer said an investigation will take place into this, but I still haven’t heard anything more.
Also, our government has handled the pandemic so catastrophically, yet Starmer hasn’t held them to account enough.
It has been suggested that 100,000 people joined Labour in the run-up to this year’s leadership election – specifically right-wingers (euphemistically calling themselves “centrists” intending to ensure that no left-wing candidate could succeed Jeremy Corbyn.
The got their wish. Perhaps Keir Starmer will be happy to lead his tepid, watered-down, racist new New Labour with the support of these.
But he’ll be leading a party that is forever in opposition. UK politics is moving elsewhere.
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.
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!
Labour: whose memberships has the party suspended?
This is peculiar.
The Labour Party has said it has suspended party members named in a leaked party report as having broken rules.
The claim, it seems, was not made voluntarily but in response to High Court litigation.
A party member named Mark Howell has brought a claim for breach of contract against the party, demanding damages as well as the expulsion of members who broke internal rules and a referral to the CPS for possible prosecutions.
He claims party funds and resources were deliberately deployed at the 2017 election, “not to win vulnerable seats presently held by rival parties but instead to increase majorities in safe seats of certain favoured party Members of Parliament.”
In other words, he says Labour breached its contract by sabotaging its election campaign in not trying to win enough seats to win a Parliamentary majority.
According to the Evening Standard:
The court heard three separate investigations have been launched by Labour since the report was leaked, while a written legal argument on the party’s behalf confirmed that members have been suspended.
“The party has promptly commenced an investigation into whether any members referred to in the Report have, based on the materials referred to in the Report, breached the Party’s rules”, it said.
“Some of the party members have been suspended from membership so far as it is necessary to do so to protect the integrity of the investigation.”
“To protect the integrity of the investigation” – to This Writer, that suggests the suspensions were of party officers who might have had a chance to interfere – such as those in the governance and legal unit, which investigates anti-Semitism accusations, among other complaints.
But it may also indicate suspensions of people suspected of leaking the report.
The party has faced multiple, insistent demands for suspensions over the allegations in the report but stonewalled – suggesting the latter is the more likely case.
Labour has insisted that no further hearings will be needed until its internal investigations – three of them – are concluded, around mid-July.
We’ll know the way the wind is blowing by then, in any event, depending on whether any of those accused of sabotaging the 2017 election or racially abusing Labour MPs end up facing expulsion or other punitive action – or if someone is named as the whistleblower who leaked the report.
And that should tell us everything we need to know about Keir Starmer’s position on this issue.
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.
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!
Dominic Cummings and Boris Johnson: we expect a higher standard from government than this shifty pair.
Congratulations to the Great British (and Northern Irish?) public for refusing to meekly accept the unacceptable from Boris Johnson and Dominic Cummings.
They – we – expect a higher standard from our elected representatives.
If you haven’t written to your MP already – or if you have and fancy adding a bit more – you can do so by visiting Write To Them.
The furore over Dominic Cummings’ breach of lockdown rules has prompted tens of thousands of people to flood their MPs’ inboxes in what some described as the biggest outpouring since Brexit, a Guardian analysis has found.
As Boris Johnson tried to draw a line under the crisis involving his chief adviser, constituents across the country sent missives to their MPs, with many sharing stories of their own lockdown hardships.
A Guardian analysis covering 117 MPs found they have received a total of 31,738 emails since a joint Guardian and Daily Mirror investigation a week ago divulged that Cummings had travelled to County Durham and taken a trip to a beauty spot with his family after suffering coronavirus symptoms.
If that level of correspondence was reflected across all 650 MPs, it would suggest the revelations may have sparked as many as 180,000 items of correspondence. The numbers were either provided in response to the Guardian’s request for figures, or in statements MPs had released to constituents.
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.
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!
Jacob Rees-Mogg: he wants a return to the way Parliament was conducted long ago and he doesn’t care if MPs die as a result.
MPs have voted to end the “virtual” Parliamentary proceedings they have been enjoying since the lockdown started.
From June 2, they will have to attend in order to take part in debates – even though the limit of 50 people in the Commons chamber at any time will remain.
How’s that going to work, then?
Jacob Rees-Mogg, laughably the current Leader of the House, reckons the change will restore sufficient scrutiny of policy matters, but it is difficult to understand his reasoning.
With fewer people allowed in the Chamber, there will be less opportunity for our representatives to have their voices heard.
Rees-Mogg whined that virtual proceedings slowed down debates to one-third of normal pace – but isn’t that better than excluding MPs from debates altogether?
And then there’s the question of whether the decision is effectively one to “euthanise” MPs:
Jacob Rees-Mogg has been told by a senior Conservative backbencher that an attempt to return to a “physical” parliament will in effect “euthanise” MPs who are sick, shielding and self-isolating.
Former minister Robert Halfon said the proposals would discriminate and threaten the lives of some MPs.
“Is it really morally just to say in effect to MPs, because you are not Tarzan-like and able to swing through the chamber, beating your chest shouting to your constituents: ‘Look, I am here!’ that you are effectively euthanised from the Commons?
“MPs who are disrupted by this awful pandemic are not just old horses to be sent to the knackers’ yard,” he said.
Some of you may be confused by Mr Halfon’s speech.
It seems he was not suggesting that MPs would catch the coronavirus and die in what some members of the public might consider a mercy-killing (as far as the UK’s citizens are concerned).
Instead, it seems he was suggesting that MPs would be excluded from proceedings, meaning they might as well be dead as far as the good of their constituents is concerned. It’s opaque.
More to the point, perhaps is a letter signed by 35 MPs, arguing that a return to a “physical” parliament could mean that those in high-risk categories including BAME MPs, older MPs or those who are pregnant will be disproportionately restricted.
One very dangerous aspect will be the return of physical voting, in which MPs will be packed into small spaces as they file through the “aye” or “no” lobby. That creates a threat of contracting Covid-19, that could be fatal for some.
But Rees-Mogg was never likely to listen to arguments against it. That is the traditional way in which MPs vote and, as the “Member for the 18th Century”, his emotional tie to it far outweighs any concern for the wellbeing of others.
ADDITIONAL: A reader has just reminded me that MPs were all given £10,000 to facilitate working from home. Are they going to give any of that money back? Ten big ones for just eight weeks’ lockdown seems exorbitantly excessive to This Writer!
More than half a million members have heard that party staff spent years working to stop the party from winning at elections, and to foment distrust by – for example – failing to do anything about anti-Semitism.
They have been told that the party they joined – and into which they paid subscriptions – has been actively working against their wishes.
And over the last week, they have seen the new leader of that party doing his very best to protect the perpetrators of this monumental betrayal.
So it seems likely that many of them – huge numbers, in fact – will follow the example of Sarah-Jane McDonough and demand the return of the subscriptions they rightly feel were taken under false pretences.
If enough of them do that – and many may band together to demand it through the courts if the party tries to deny them what they want – Labour will run out of money and cease to function.
So Keir Starmer is likely to be facing a choice – either now or in the near future.
He can make explicitly public efforts to clean up the Labour Party – or he can learn to live with being the disgraced leader who killed the Party of the People. It’s up to him.
A Labour councillor is demanding that the party fully refunds all her membership fees and donations following the revelation that senior HQ staff conspired to sabotage Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.
Stevenage councillor Sarah-Jane McDonough has written to request a refund of payments from May 2015 to the present day on the grounds that they were taken “fraudulently.”
Her letter was sent after an internal Labour report, titled The Work of the Labour Party’s Governance and Legal Unit in Relation to Antisemitism, 2014-2019, was leaked last weekend.
Management and staff on the right of the party were found to have used abusive language in WhatsApp chats to disparage Mr Corbyn and his supporters, along with other left-wing MPs and party employees.
The culprits also boasted of doing no work for months and conspiring to sabotage election campaigns and Labour’s attempts to deal with anti-semitism complaints.
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.
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!
Purge: if these badges represent Labour members who have been accused of anti-Semitism, how many do you think will get a fair hearing of their case under Keir Starmer? I’ll tell you: none.
Those of us who have been falsely accused of anti-Semitism may have hoped that a new Labour leader would take a strong position against the lies.
That was a forlorn hope, it seems.
We had a glimpse of what might come when Keir Starmer – along with, to their shame, every other Labour leadership candidate – agreed to support the Tory-run Board of Deputies of British Jews and its so-called “10 Commandments” demanding the persecution and expulsion of anybody their trolls decide to tar with false accusations. Some of these demands are not even legal so it will be interesting to see how Starmer enacts those parts of this promise.
But he made his direction of travel clear in his first speech as leader:
“Antisemitism has been a stain on our party. I have seen the grief that it has brought to so many Jewish communities. On behalf of the Labour Party I am sorry, and I will tear out this poison by its roots and judge success by the return of our Jewish members and those who felt that they could no longer support us.”
Sorry, but anti-Semitism has not been a stain on the Labour Party. False accusations of anti-Semitism have been. But the liars who made those claims have been allowed to get away with it and now it seems their witch-hunt will claim many new victims.
I’m sure it has brought grief to Jewish communities – especially those that have been split between those who are gullible enough to believe anything the BoD and its trolls tell them, and those who trust their own judgement.
But a vow to “tear out this poison by its roots” makes it clear that Starmer has swallowed the lies hook, line and sinker. He will purge the party of anybody tarred with these accusations – whether true or false – and his pledge to judge his success by whether Jewish members who have left the party come back means that the trolls can make him do whatever they want.
This is a man who will not work for the people but will act only for the minority sectarian interests that control him.
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.
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!
The arena: The lies Labour used to expel one member are to be exposed at Bristol Civil Justice Centre.
Labour leadership candidates were falling over themselves to apologise for failing to tackle a fabricated anti-Semitism crisis, according to BBC News.
What a shame they have not been so forthcoming in apologising to the members they have wronged.
In my own case, Labour faked evidence and then passed it to like-minded members of the press, in order to create a false impression that I was an anti-Semite. The party then used this as an excuse to expel me.
And now Labour will have to answer for those activities – in court on May 26.
The party breached its own disciplinary rules and regulations, and data protection procedures – in the process breaking the Data Protection Act – in its determination to expel a perfectly innocent member with one of the most abhorrent smears there can be.
But party leaders did not realise that they had laid themselves wide open to a legal challenge in the courts – over breach of contract.
The party is governed by its rule book and it broke those rules in its attack on me. I feel sure that other people will have been similarly wronged.
The court hearing will begin at 10am and a whole day has been allotted to it.
In the meantime, candidates like Emily Thornberry are apologising for failing to kick out members on the basis of nothing more than a flimsy claim – most probably by people who support the Conservatives.
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.
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!
By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. This includes scrolling or continued navigation. more information
The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.
