Labour party

Jeremy Corbyn could be subject to a trigger ballot designed for the deselection of MPs, under plans discussed tonight by members of one of his most supportive party groups. The Labour Representation Committee, from which both Corbyn and John McDonnell hail, met this evening to discuss how to get its way when it comes to party democracy. Save for when McDonnell popped in to thank the LRC for continuing to organise when it looked as though the Left would never win a foothold in the party, the mood was one of frustration. Members were largely cheerful yet also irritated that plans for ‘open selections’ – more commonly known as mandatory

A lot of Labour’s energy at the moment seems to be spent on internal battles over which faction wins power on which committee, and whether it should be easier to deselect sitting MPs. A measure of whether its conference is a success is whether it manages to talk about what it wants to do in government. I understand that the leadership’s aim this week is to try to produce an analysis of where society has gone wrong. This sounds rather ‘Broken Britain’, though unsurprisingly the party won’t be using that line. Instead, the tag is ‘rebuilding Britain’, and Jeremy Corbyn and his colleagues will be talking about the impact of

Is Jeremy Corbyn the victim in Labour’s anti-Semitism scandal? Emily Thornberry seems to think so. The shadow foreign secretary said that the Labour leader was ‘distressed’ by the claims against him and that he found the row ‘very difficult’ to deal with because it went ‘so against his idea of who he is’. In an interview with the Evening Standard, the Corbynite MP said that while the Dear Leader was usually ‘very Zen’ about criticism, ‘calling him an anti-Semite, calling him a racist, that just went straight to the absolute core of him. It really distressed him’. Poor old Jeremy. Mr S isn’t sure that this will help calm tensions

As so often these days, if you want real political insight, go to Mumsnet. In a web chat there today, John McDonnell has offered extensive proof that – whatever you think of his politics and policies – he is an extremely professional and skilful political communicator. Mumsnet, as Gordon Brown, Nick Clegg and countless others will remember, is about the toughest gig out there: you’re faced with a bombardment of questions ranging from traditional political analysis to deeply personal issues and of course humour, much of it biscuit-related. Striking the right tone is very, very hard. These days, Mumsnet is even harder for politicians because an awful lot of users

When Peter Willsman was re-elected onto the Labour NEC this month, there was a sense of shock in the party. It wasn’t that it was surprising a Corbyn ally had beaten a moderate in a party vote – that’s now the status quo. Instead, it was curious that Willsman was elected despite being recorded saying that Jewish ‘Trump fanatics’ are ‘making up’ anti-Semitism allegations within the party. The incident led Momentum to revoke their endorsement of his candidacy. So, with Willsman back on the NEC, questions had remained as to how the party would handle his re-election, with many MPs calling on him to stand down and spare the party (any

It’s been over a year since the last general election, but it looks like there are still some Labour MPs who are confused about their presence on the opposition benches. One such appears to be the shadow minister for women and equalities and Corbyn devotee, Dawn Butler. In an interview on TalkRadio this afternoon, it was put to the MP,  that Labour’s manifesto can’t have been that brilliant if they went on to lose the general election. Butler responded: ‘Well actually, we didn’t lose. We didn’t win, but we didn’t lose the election’ Dawn Butler: "We didn’t lose the election. We didn’t win." Watch ▼@Matthew_Wright | @DawnButlerBrent | @TVKev https://t.co/sv3MZUm41c

Former Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks has been roughed up enough lately and I am loath to add to the calumnies but something he keeps saying bothers me. ‘The hate that begins with Jews never ends with Jews.’ Sacks has dropped this aphorism into speeches and articles for the past few years and no wonder: it’s a pithier version of the Niemöller verse, a shorthand for the metastatic nature of prejudice. First of all, I’m not convinced it’s true. They always come for the Jews but they don’t always come for the Communists or the Catholics or the trade unionists, not least because the Communists and the Catholics and the trade