Current Affairs The Labour Party

Status
Not open for further replies.
Regarding the Leadership...

”We found that the Labour Party committed unlawful harassment through the acts of its agents, including one individual who was a National Executive Committee member. Their conduct included suggesting that complaints of antisemitism were fake or smears, which undermines the Labour Party’s commitment to zero tolerance of antisemitism and ignores legitimate and genuine complaints of antisemitism within the Party.
We also found evidence of political interference in the handling of antisemitism complaints throughout the period of the investigation.
The Labour Party has shown an ability to act decisively when it wants to, through the introduction of a bespoke process to deal with sexual harassment complaints. It is hard not to conclude that antisemitism within the Labour Party could have been tackled more effectively if the leadership had chosen to do so.
We find that the Labour Party has failed to address antisemitism within the Party in a way that demonstrates its stated commitment to zero tolerance, or that ensures all Jewish members feel welcome and can be confident that antisemitism will be dealt with effectively.”........
 
Unlawful Act Notice

”Unlawful act notice served under section 21 of the Equality Act 2006 (Notice)

In the matter of the Investigation into the Labour Party as described in the terms of reference dated 28 May 2019.
The Commission for Equality and Human Rights, commonly referred to as ‘the Equality and Human Rights Commission’ (EHRC), hereby gives the following Notice to the General Secretary of the Labour Party, Mr David Evans, pursuant to section 21 of the Equality Act 2006 (EA 2006) that:

The Labour Party has been the subject of an investigation under section 20(1)(a) of the EA 2006. Following that investigation the EHRC is satisfied that the Labour Party has committed the following unlawful acts (Unlawful Acts):

1. The Labour Party committed unlawful harassment of its members, contrary to section 101(4)(a) of the Equality Act 2010, related to race (Jewish ethnicity), through the acts of its agents Ken Livingstone and Pam Bromley (as further set out in Chapter 3 of, and Annex 2 to, the EHRC’s report of the investigation titled: ‘Investigation into antisemitism in the Labour Party’ (Report)).

2. The Labour Party’s practice or policy of Political Interference (as defined in Chapter 5 of the Report) in antisemitism complaints amounted to unlawful indirect discrimination against its Jewish members,26 contrary to section 101(2)(a) and / or (d) of the Equality Act 2010. As explained in the Report, the Labour Party operated two separate relevant unlawful practices or policies: first, the overall practice or policy operating from March 2016 to May 2019 in which LOTO or the leadership was involved in ‘politically sensitive’ complaints; and secondly, the specific and formal practice or policy of referring all antisemitism complaints to LOTO in March–April 2018.

3. The Labour Party’s practice or policy, prior to August 2020, of failing to provide adequate training to those handling complaints of antisemitism amounted to unlawful indirect discrimination against its Jewish members, contrary to section 101(2)(a) and / or (d) of the Equality Act 2010 (see Chapter 9 of the Report). “.....
 
peteblue said:
From the report....

“In many more files there was evidence of antisemitic conduct by an ‘ordinary’ member of the Labour Party, who did not hold any office or role, whose conduct the Party could not be directly responsible for under equality law.
The unwanted conduct complained of in this group related to social media comments that:
• diminished the scale or significance of the Holocaust
• expressed support for Hitler or the Nazis
• compared Israelis to Hitler or the Nazis
• described a ‘witch hunt’ in the Labour Party, or said that complaints had
been manufactured by the ‘Israel lobby’
• referenced conspiracies about the Rothschilds and Jewish power and
control over financial or other institutions
• blamed Jewish people for the ‘antisemitism crisis’ in the Labour Party”
• blamed Jewish people generally for actions of the state of Israel
• used ‘Zio’ as an antisemitic term, and
• accused British Jews of greater loyalty to Israel than Britain.

Now the above could be regarded as a minority of party members, but the leadership did nothing to stop it. Even now it appears that Corbyn is trying to play the report down...

Additionally, from the report...

”Conclusion
We find that political interference in individual complaints within the Labour Party prevented its complaints process from working as it should have.
We also find that the practice of political interference, between March 2016 and May 2019, indirectly discriminated against Jewish members and was unlawful.”

This is particularly damning tbh, this is a direct accusation of an unlawful act or actions....
Click to expand...
Barmy gets who put that report together.

No way they'll clamp anyone from using the perfectly legitimate and long used term 'zionist'.

That's the insidious nature of this report.
 
peteblue said:
From the report....

“In many more files there was evidence of antisemitic conduct by an ‘ordinary’ member of the Labour Party, who did not hold any office or role, whose conduct the Party could not be directly responsible for under equality law.
The unwanted conduct complained of in this group related to social media comments that:
• diminished the scale or significance of the Holocaust
• expressed support for Hitler or the Nazis
• compared Israelis to Hitler or the Nazis
• described a ‘witch hunt’ in the Labour Party, or said that complaints had
been manufactured by the ‘Israel lobby’
• referenced conspiracies about the Rothschilds and Jewish power and
control over financial or other institutions
• blamed Jewish people for the ‘antisemitism crisis’ in the Labour Party”
• blamed Jewish people generally for actions of the state of Israel
• used ‘Zio’ as an antisemitic term, and
• accused British Jews of greater loyalty to Israel than Britain.

Now the above could be regarded as a minority of party members, but the leadership did nothing to stop it. Even now it appears that Corbyn is trying to play the report down...

Additionally, from the report...

”Conclusion
We find that political interference in individual complaints within the Labour Party prevented its complaints process from working as it should have.
We also find that the practice of political interference, between March 2016 and May 2019, indirectly discriminated against Jewish members and was unlawful.”

This is particularly damning tbh, this is a direct accusation of an unlawful act or actions....
Click to expand...

3 things Pete.

1) Theres no question anti-semitism exists in Labour. Of course it does. The evidence on number of cases shows us it went down under Corbyns tenureship.

2) He tried to tackle it. You could say he didnt do it well enough, but he certainly tried.

3) To make points 1 & 2, to any rational actor would not be seen as being racist. Even if it were, it's on another plain to Holocaust denial.

As a final aside, my local MP shared a post suggesting Jews controlled the EU and liked a post with a Nazi slogans on it. The party have not disciplined her, not has she apologised (or even responded to when questioned from me). How would you describe such an organisation who were inactive on that?
 
catcherintherye said:
3 things Pete.

1) Theres no question anti-semitism exists in Labour. Of course it does. The evidence on number of cases shows us it went down under Corbyns tenureship.

2) He tried to tackle it. You could say he didnt do it well enough, but he certainly tried.

3) To make points 1 & 2, to any rational actor would not be seen as being racist. Even if it were, it's on another plain to Holocaust denial.

As a final aside, my local MP shared a post suggesting Jews controlled the EU and liked a post with a Nazi slogans on it. The party have not disciplined her, not has she apologised (or even responded to when questioned from me). How would you describe such an organisation who were inactive on that?
Click to expand...

I really don’t know. I’ve never thought of Corbyn as being overtly antisemitic. But unfortunately some of his supporters have been, and perhaps he has not been as evangelical about this issue as some others. I happen to know Louise Ellman, as she was a good neighbour of mine and did some tremendous work within her role. For her to be abused and have to leave the Labour Party was really quite disgraceful, as she had put many decades of work into her party. But Labour changed under Corbyn, there are no excuses, he had his agenda, right or wrong......
 
peteblue said:
I really don’t know. I’ve never thought of Corbyn as being overtly antisemitic. But unfortunately some of his supporters have been, and perhaps he has not been as evangelical about this issue as some others. I happen to know Louise Ellman, as she was a good neighbour of mine and did some tremendous work within her role. For her to be abused and have to leave the Labour Party was really quite disgraceful, as she had put many decades of work into her party. But Labour changed under Corbyn, there are no excuses, he had his agenda, right or wrong......
Click to expand...
Were you a member of the constituency party that she was the MP for?
 
peteblue said:
I really don’t know. I’ve never thought of Corbyn as being overtly antisemitic. But unfortunately some of his supporters have been, and perhaps he has not been as evangelical about this issue as some others. I happen to know Louise Ellman, as she was a good neighbour of mine and did some tremendous work within her role. For her to be abused and have to leave the Labour Party was really quite disgraceful, as she had put many decades of work into her party. But Labour changed under Corbyn, there are no excuses, he had his agenda, right or wrong......
Click to expand...

I saw that speaker John Bercow, genuinely known as a right wing Tory (and Jewish) said he'd known Corbyn to say anything inthe least bit anti-semitic. Indeed his voting record affirms that.

Of course some of his supporters are anti-semitic. Why wouldn't they be? There were around 600,000 members in Labour when he was leader, why woudn't some, indeed quite a number be anti-semitic? Why would a political organisation be free of the wider issues in society? I don't understand any idea that would suggest it would be.

As for the change, what do you think that change looked like? The data showed anti-semitism cases went down.

I popped in here a Labour Billboard from 2005, which showed Micheal, looking lke Fagin, with a gold watch and the caption "would you trust this man to look after your money?" They had another of Howard and Letwin's faces on pigs. Really base, racist stuff. I remember a lot of the stuff at that period was close to the bone, and indeed well over the line in relation to Letwin. I say that as a fairly tribal Labour loyalist, but even I can see it was wholly unnacceptable.

So if we take that as the context of before Corbyn was leader, how do we think the party has changed?

I'm all for having a serious debate, which helps us route our anti-semitism, but some of the terms and conditions on that debate at times I find a little hard to square.
 
peteblue said:
From the report....

“In many more files there was evidence of antisemitic conduct by an ‘ordinary’ member of the Labour Party, who did not hold any office or role, whose conduct the Party could not be directly responsible for under equality law.
The unwanted conduct complained of in this group related to social media comments that:
• diminished the scale or significance of the Holocaust
• expressed support for Hitler or the Nazis
• compared Israelis to Hitler or the Nazis
• described a ‘witch hunt’ in the Labour Party, or said that complaints had
been manufactured by the ‘Israel lobby’
• referenced conspiracies about the Rothschilds and Jewish power and
control over financial or other institutions
• blamed Jewish people for the ‘antisemitism crisis’ in the Labour Party”
• blamed Jewish people generally for actions of the state of Israel
• used ‘Zio’ as an antisemitic term, and
• accused British Jews of greater loyalty to Israel than Britain.

Now the above could be regarded as a minority of party members, but the leadership did nothing to stop it. Even now it appears that Corbyn is trying to play the report down...

Additionally, from the report...

”Conclusion
We find that political interference in individual complaints within the Labour Party prevented its complaints process from working as it should have.
We also find that the practice of political interference, between March 2016 and May 2019, indirectly discriminated against Jewish members and was unlawful.”

This is particularly damning tbh, this is a direct accusation of an unlawful act or actions....
Click to expand...

None of this is wrong, but for the love of god, don't negate the fact that a leaked Labour report detailed obvious mishandling for wholly political cause. The EHRC never directly stated that it was for 'left wing gain', or whatever else you're misconstruing here.
 
GwladysBlue said:
How I wish Labour had a proper leader to take on the most incompetent government in the history of this country.

Get Stamer out and someone with a backbone in.
Click to expand...
Not a fan of Starmer, but he has more chance of winning an Election than Corbyn ever did.
He has a lot of work to do to make the party attractive to the people they need to vote for them to get into number 10.
Corbyn appealed to the current party members ,but not to the wider voting public.
We need a party to be electable it hasnt been for some time , needs a complete overhaul in my opinion and if Starmer cuts a few off to get the party into shape and into power fine by me i am fed up supporting a party that has become an unelectable waste of space .
I wish we had a leader from outside of the southern bubble to take us onwards, the party is to to london centric , they and Starmer havnt a clue how northern voters think or live there lives.
If we cant win an election agaist the Tories after the last few years , it shows how bad things are.
 
edge said:
Not a fan of Starmer, but he has more chance of winning an Election than Corbyn ever did.
He has a lot of work to do to make the party attractive to the people they need to vote for them to get into number 10.
Corbyn appealed to the current party members ,but not to the wider voting public.
We need a party to be electable it hasnt been for some time , needs a complete overhaul in my opinion and if Starmer cuts a few off to get the party into shape and into power fine by me i am fed up supporting a party that has become an unelectable waste of space .
I wish we had a leader from outside of the southern bubble to take us onwards, the party is to to london centric , they and Starmer havnt a clue how northern voters think or live there lives.
If we cant win an election agaist the Tories after the last few years , it shows how bad things are.
Click to expand...
Said the same to my Dad the other day. We need a Northern leader from our heartlands to get the party to appeal to our main voter base.
 
Last edited:
I heard the torturer's friend this morning on Marr. Stated 3 or 4 times that he hoped Corbyn was taking time to seriously reflect on what he'd done.

Consider that...the man who protected the coppers who shot Menezes in the head multiple times, covered up for police undercover rapists (and now instructs Labour MPs to support their undercover operations to spy on progressive groups looking to make a positive difference), and covered up for the army waterboarding prisoners of war. And he's asking Corbyn to examine his conscience for questioning how far anti-semitism has burrowed itself into the LP...a man who has opposed racism and sectarianism in all its forms all his adult life.

The slimy Tory get.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top