Tendance Coatesy

Left Socialist Blog

Archive for the ‘East Anglia’ Category

Morning Star Warms of Labour ‘Thermidor” and Attacks ‘Neoliberal” Keir Starmer’s “Bat Squeaks”.

with 3 comments

Image result for communist party of britain

Communists Advising on Labour Strategy: “Starmer’s base is, “metropolitan stratum that derives from socially liberal and economically unadventurous middle-class values”.

The Morning Star, wholly independent of the Communist Party of Britain and owned by the Co-op gives prominent space to the views of one Nick Wright, responsible for the Communist Party of Britain’s media work, (and a former member of Straight Left)  on Labour Party “contradictions”.

Make no mistake — the competition is between the neoliberal wing and the class conscious wing of the party, writes NICK WRIGHT

Two poles of understanding seem to be emerging. On one hand we have a liberal pole of which the best exemplar is Starmer. This is gaining an impressive number of constituency nominations in meetings which, by some accounts seem older and reinforced by those who departed the scene after Jeremy Corbyn renewed his leadership and now see their Thermidor.

“Thermidor”, a word that has strayed from supporters of  Red Flag to the Morning Star (” Starmer represents the victory of the Thermidorian reaction”)

The word was used by Trotsky to refer to the way Stalin establish his power to rein in the Russian Revolution. It quickly fell out of use when it was pointed out that the ‘Thermidor’ which put an end to the Terror in the French Revolution, was not only inappropriate for a rule that vastly expanded the terror in the USSR, it  referred to the way one fraction of radical bpeurgeisie and its allies, during the bourgeois revolution was replaced by another, bourgeois,fraction. (1)

Is Wright suggesting that Corbyn led a bourgeois revolution, or a new Soviet Revolution  and that its gravedigger is in the wings?

One the other hand we have a more explicitly socialist pole given clearest expression by Rebecca Long Bailey.

What is important here are the bat-squeaks. These are emitted at such a high frequency that to hear them requires devoted attention. Comrade Starmer has doubled down on his pledges to respect the Corbyn heritage and presents a package of policies modelled in all surface appearances on the most distinctive elements in the 2017 and 2019 manifestos.

Cde Wright battens onto his favourite candidate,

These, by contrast,  are the politics we need,

 ….a more thoroughgoing critique of capitalism, encapsulated in classically class-conscious language and predicated on an assumption that fighting for these policies is an existential challenge to the main features of contemporary British capitalism……

Rebecca Long Bailey has made a good job of clothing this class perspective in the kind of thought-out detail that can convince the electorate. Her command of the Green New Deal, which she authored, must be a central feature of Labour’s pitch whoever comes out on top in the leadership contest.

The Green New Deal has not been a surefire winner for European left parties.

Benoît Hamon scored  6.36% of the vote in the French Presidential election, as the Parti Socialiste candidate,  after making this, dubbed “ecological transition”, a central part of his platform.

He won a 3,27% and no seats in the 2019  European election after his splinter group, Génération.s ran a list in co-operation with DieM25 and others,   which centred on the issues, called the “federalist European Green New Deal”.

The Podemos breakway Más País, led by  Íñigo Errejón has also given priority to the “La transición ecológica”.

After repeated failure (in the  2019 Spanish General Eleciton they got 2.40% of the vote  3 seats in the Spanish Parliament)  they have now retreated back to their Madrid bases, or “put in a draw” as the Spanish press puts it, “Errejón guarda Más País en un cajón“).

But nothing douses Wright’s ethusiasm for Long-Bailey.

What a contrast, he laments, with Keir Starmer,

Starmer’s particular appeal (as was Thornberry’s) to a spectrum of opinion that wants to move on from, away from, or even reverse Corbyn’s positions is clothed in the cultural and linguistic signifiers of a metropolitan stratum that derives from socially liberal and economically unadventurous middle-class values.

As they say down at the Slaughtered Lamb, “wot bleeding linguistic signifiers are these? How do they, deal with the Brexit “contradiction between working-class priorities and middle-class values”? More like Starmer embodies “the class interests of the dominant section of Britain’s capitalist class underpinned the Remain campaign and the People’s Vote device.”

In a master stroke Wright show’s the issues at stake, “if this leadership contest results in a more-clearly articulated distinction between the liberal pole in Labour politics and the class-politics pole so much the better.”

On Lisa Nanday he has these kind words,

But the logic of her challenge has compelled her to re-energise several strands of traditionally reactionary politics in British Labour. The result is a cacophony of conflicting messages which are acquiring coherence only by her now more-precisely articulated reactionary ideas.

This Blog will not deal with his further reflections as surely the news turns that, hope against hope, a window opens for Labour to “emulate Corbyn at his best.”

Rebecca long-Bailey is said to be gladdened at this response to her heartfelt appeal.

Labour can look forward to Corbyn’s winning advice for a long time to come!

Meanwhile in East Anglia:

The signatories include Ipswich council leader David Ellesmere, the leader of the Labour opposition at Suffolk County Council Sarah Adams and the Labour group leaders on both East and West Suffolk councils Peter Byatt and Diane Hind.




(1) On this point, and why Trotskyists questioned the term see: Chapter 1. Michel Lequenne. Le Trotskisme, une histoire sans fard (2018 edition)


Written by Andrew Coates

February 21, 2020 at 1:20 pm

The Village in Revolt. The Story of the Longest Strike in History. Shaun Jeffery. Review – the Burston School Strike.

with 3 comments

Image result for The Village in Revolt. The Story of the Longest Strike in History. Shaun Jeffery.

“…hard to recommend this thoroughly researched book on our labour movement more highly.”

The Village in Revolt. The Story of the Longest Strike in History. Shaun Jeffery. Higdon Press.2018.

On the first Sunday of September every year trade unionists, members of the Labour Party and other left-wing organisations, rally on Burston Village Green. Standing on the side is the Burston Strike School, now a Trust-run memorial. In the past years figures such as Audrey Wise, Tony Benn, John McDonnell and Jeremy Corbyn have spoken to the crowd. The march around the flat village lanes, a “candlestick” is both a present-day labour gathering, and to celebrate what the historian of the Farm Workers’ Union, Reg Groves called, a “microcosm of the rural war” (Sharpen the Sickle! 1948).

On the 13th of May 1917 there was a great labour movement gathering. A “Great Eastern Railway special charter train from London Liverpool Street” writes Shaun Jeffery in his Introduction. It had brought around a thousand people to Burston. As they paraded with two bands, amongst union banners from the National Agricultural Labourers’ Union, and National Union of Railwaymen, Labour political figures and Sylvia Pankhurst, joined villagers and the children who attended the school. The opening of the Burston Strike School drew people from London, Norwich and across the country.

Replacing a temporary structure used since the walk-out began in 1914 it bore an “engraved tablet” writes Shaun Jeffery, “recorded for perpetuity just why they had all come to be there.” “Mr T. Higdon and Mrs A.K. Higdon were unjustly dismissed from the Council School of this village on the 31st day of March 1914. This building, was erected by public subscription to protests against the action to provide a free school, to be a centre of rural democracy and a memorial to the villagers’ fight for Freedom.”

Village in Revolt tells the story of the Higdons, Tom and Annie, and the Burston school strike, including their adversary, the Reverend Charles Tucker Eland. Shaun Jeffery charts the fortunes of the ‘National’, the agricultural labourers’ union, (NALU) to which “Tom’s own life was to be eternally tied” against the backdrop of the rise of militant union action in the years running up to 1914. The story takes us to socialism, “For decades” Jeffery’s observes, “Socialists in Norwich had been making various attempts to gain support in the surrounding villages”. By 1913 the Independent Labour Party, by then part of the Labour Party in Parliament, would draw up a “Rural Programme” and MP George Roberts would attempt to get a wages board for agriculture.

Tom and Annie lives, and their career as schoolteachers, were bound up with protests against rural squalor and exploitation. Before Burston they had disputes with the education authorities over “illegal employment of boys by the local farmers during term time”, that is, a clash with the local “squireachy” of parson and landowners foreshadowed the conflicts after their 1911 appointment in Burston.

The reader will perhaps sometimes feel that the cause of the friction and “little altercation” between the Higdons and their – powerful – enemies was not always one-sided. Rebutting the idea that they did not accept outside guidance, they showed “openness to informed advice”. Yet “Any accusation that the Higdons did not suffer fools in position of power who served themselves…would certainly be a charge harder to refute.” Nincompoops amongst their adversaries abounded. That one of the first charges against them in Burston was “non-attendance at church” followed by the same Reverend Eland, the rector, complaining that Annie was “Lighting fires without permission” casts darkness on their adversary’s behaviour. It ended in claims that the Head Teacher, Tom had been “discourteous” to the Managers, and that Mrs Higdon had beaten two Barnardo girls with a cane.

The Children’s Strike.

The details of the dispute are the work of the book. The Higdons were sacked, April the 1st 1914 came, and the children paraded with banners and cards with the words, “We want our teachers Back”. “Neither Violet Potter, nor any of the other senior scholars involved in the strike, could remember who exactly came up with the idea of taking the action that they had embarked upon”.

These opening episodes in the dispute take us from the Norfolk fields to wider conflicts. School strikes were ‘in the air’ across the country and, Jeffery’s suggest can be seen as a way in which “pupils and parents sought to assert community control over provided education” – perhaps a lesson for today when anti-community Academy schools exist. This dimension may help to explain why the wider labour movement gave backing, from the newly founded NUR (1913), to the more directly concerned Agricultural workers. Nor does The Village in Revolt neglect the most obvious of backgrounds, the Great War. “Tom Higdon was no militarist warmonger, but like many Labour leaders, such as his friend George Edwards, he had come to the conclusion that there was no other alternative but to enter the war.”

After the Armistice ambitious plans for the Strike School and national reforms in its wake did not happen. Tom Higdon was disappointed that a “great upheaval did not take place”. Yet the First Trade Union School in England was honoured as “living monument to the struggle against rural tyranny and for democracy”. In the post-war years, “Supporters that the Higdons hadn’t fallen out with would still visit and address large audiences in the green in front of the school”. Despite hard work for the cause of the agricultural workers Tom never rose to prominence in the labour movement. The Rally was revived in the early 1980s and continues to draw large crowds each year.

Both as an absorbing narrative and history The Village in Revolt is an unqualified success. It is hard to recommend this thoroughly researched book on our labour movement more highly.


Written by Andrew Coates

August 27, 2019 at 11:12 am

The Internationalist Anti-Brexit Left faced with Trump and Johnson, Popular Front Government or United Front Against Brexit?

with 5 comments


‘Taz’s Angle on Johnson-Trump ‘Deal’.

One of the many fairy tales that self-identifying left-wingers who back Brexit tell themselves is that the dispute between other Brexiteers and Remainer is just a dispute between “two nationalisms”.

One of the contes de fées  that toadies of Boris Johnson tell each other is that the British Prime Minister is standing up for Britain in the famous trade negotiations with the US President.

There is little doubt that nationalism is one of the commonest traits in politics today.  That and whingeing about vaguely defined “elites” and “oligarchies”.

But what is really at stake in Brexit as comrade Paul Mason explains, is that the British bourgeoisie- a class which rules this country in the Marxist and democratic socialist point of view,  is divided.

The moneyed elite of Britain are split along the same factional lines as in the US. There is a coalition of interests that needs to break down the rules-based multilateral global order that was built during the previous 30 years: the frackers, the hedge-fund managers, the casino owners, the property developers and, above all, people who’ve sunk money into fossil fuels.

They need climate science to be proved wrong and for the multilateral commitment to reduce carbon emissions to break down. They need central banks to underwrite their business strategies but states to allow them to evade tax. They need governments to permit monopolies, speculative development and rent-seeking business strategies. And they need democracy to be a sham.

Above all, they need chaos. Because chaos is the environment in which people with money make more money. Johnson’s cabinet is basically a hand-picked team of yes men and women for this faction of British capitalism. Johnson, like Donald Trump, understands that to succeed he must become a chaos engine.

By contrast,

On the other side there are, of course, the real bosses of real businesses based in Britain, like Airbus, Honda, BMW – and the vice chancellors of the big universities, plus the major law and accountancy firms. They are terrified of no deal, and the atmosphere of xenophobia it will bring. Plus, there’s tens of thousands of small firms – from the metal bashers to the care home chains to the local garden centre – who will see their access to finance evaporate in a no-deal crisis.

The Tory Party which gives voice to these interests has, Mason argues, has changed over the decades,

Instead of being a tool for protecting the interests of British capitalism, the Tory party has, over the 30 year period of neoliberalism, become the tool for protecting oligarchic global capital in Britain: it represents the Saudi monarchy more than it represents Suffolk.

The traditional business elite won’t stop a no-deal Brexit — only Labour can be trusted to

The problem with Mason’s view is that he considers that Labour can be ” be trusted with the national interest even where the capitalist elite is split and factionalised. ” He believes in a coalition of the left and centre to carry this forward, a “popular front”.

This is different to the views of many radical internationalist left-wingers.

For a start Trump’s use of tariff wars suggests that the picture of globalisation as the inevitability of ever more fluid capital and good flows is flawed.

Capitalism may be accelerating but nationalist politicians can put spokes in its wheels.

It is also the case that Labour needs to build an electoral  coalition, a left bloc, that appeals to a majority by expressing the views and interests of those who are in conflict with both wings of the bourgeoisie, the global chancers and those based in “real Britain”.

There is a lot of attention on Mason’s call for a “popular front”.

There is many problems with this.

It is not because Mason uses the term refers to a period of history – past – where the European left was urged by Communist parties and their left allies, to unite with liberals against fascism – with degrees of success. One such electoral alliance  in 1936, in France, the Front Populaire, achieved some of the kind of social democratic reforms (workers’ rights, working hours, holidays and security) that Attlee’s post-war Labour government did, and is warmly remembered for its achievements.  Nor that it evokes images of the Spanish Frente Popular which ended, after heroic resistance to Franco, in tragedy, events which still sear in the hearts of the left across the world.

This is the past.

Today we have to create a left that is open-looking, internationalist, that is not just an electoral coalition, but has the politics that can challenge not just the backward looking nationalism of the Tories and the Brexit Party. We have to refound our politics on outward politics that avoid the trap of the “rooted” “somewhere” left, part of which has fuelled, if not participated in a “red-Brown front” with the right wing pro-Brexit bloc.

There is not doubt, however, were the principal contradiction lies.

The ‘trade deal’ with Trump  under which we will have to accept this, illustrates it.

With Boris Johnson as PM the ‘thriving through chaos’ wing have taken off.

The issue of Brexit calls for unity on stopping it, not on a whole programme for an election aiming at winning office.

All are welcome in the United Front Against Brexit!

March separately, strike together.

As in here:




Written by Andrew Coates

August 25, 2019 at 12:33 pm

Galloway Gives Advice on Peterborough Brexit Party Defeat and Gets Embroiled in Charity Scandal.

with 3 comments

Image result for galloway and farage

Red-Brown Front in Trouble After Peterborough Labour Win.

The Peterborough result merits a longer post – starting with how the Brexit Party has clearly not got its Crosby and  Glasgow Hillhead by-election moment, but for the moment this is my reaction.

Comrade Missy to Young Sheldon,

“Why can’t I just be happy?”

Here is Galloway’s comment.

Only a few weeks ago..

Outspoken ex-MP George Galloway announces he will stand in Peterborough by-election

Then, on the Third of May.

George Galloway wants to be the Brexit Party candidate in the Peterborough by-election

Followed by, on the 8th of May,

Peterborough by-election: George Galloway withdraws from contest after missing out on Brexit Party nomination

No doubt we will hear the sound of sour grapes being chomped for some  time to come.

Today we also learn that Britain’s leading Red-Brown fronter has troubles of his own.

Galloway charity ‘may have delivered no aid despite £1m donations’


A charity fronted by the former MP George Galloway may not have conducted any charitable activity or distributed any humanitarian aid despite claiming to have gathered £1m in public donations, according to an investigation from the charity regulator.

On Thursday it finally concluded its investigation and found that the trustees had:

  • Failed in their statutory duty to provide any financial accounts, in breach of the charity’s own governing document and charity law.
  • Failed to address the outstanding regulatory concerns by completing the steps required in the action plan.
  • Failed to co-operate with the commission during its investigation, including failing to provide information.
  • Failed in their duty to provide and maintain proper financial controls and to properly manage and administer their charity.
  • Failed to discharge their duties to safeguard the charity’s money and assets and to act prudently, which included avoiding activities that may have placed their funds, assets or reputation at undue risk, namely:
    • they failed in the basic requirement to keep receipts and records of income and expenditure and so be able to properly account for charitable funds raised and spent. These basic requirements are all the more important when charitable funds are raised from members of the public and used for humanitarian needs in conflict zones;
    • there were no basic financial controls or policies in place to account for and safeguard funds coming into the charity and being spent.

The commission concluded: “In summary, the charity was not properly governed, managed or administered by its trustees – as a result of those failings its reputation, that of the wider charitable sector, and charitable funds donated by the public to the charity were put at risk.”

Written by Andrew Coates

June 7, 2019 at 12:04 pm

After his ‘red’ mates, Farage’s ‘brown’ allies make headlines in the ‘confusionist’ Brexit Party.

with 4 comments

Ipswich Brexit Campaign Car.

There is the claim that the working class, the “popular” vote, is for Brexit.

This is contested claim (ignoring the strong popular anti-Brexit vote in major cities to begin with), and, odd, since many of the people advancing the claim say they are Leninists.

To Lenin, on a generous interpretation, socialism is the fusion, by persuasion,  between Marxist ideas and the labour movement, it is not the “spontaneous” product of opinion polls.

On a less generous view Leninism claims to be a scientific standpoint celebrated by the various, not to say, teeming, micro-parties of that section of the left leading the working class by these “tribunes of the people” by a variety of stunts and tactics.

The major reason they refer to the social basis of the Brexit vote is not because they have become psephologists but because it’s the view they support.

Take this from the revolutionary socialists (self-proclaimed Leninists) of Counterfire.

Lindsey German says today (A general election with a People’s Brexit is our escape route from this Westminster quagmire), after the local elections that,

Labour is winded by these results, not least because they weren’t expected, but it has to fight back in the Euros. Firstly against Farage, the fascist ‘Tommy Robinson’, UKIP and all the rest of the racist right. But as importantly, by putting an agenda which argues for a People’s Brexit (something Labour seems to have abandoned in the face of its own Remainers), and for a completely altered set of priorities on domestic issues ..

Labour, they say, must, ” Demand that general election and a People’s Brexit, and redouble efforts to campaign around other issues – climate emergency, austerity deaths, housing.”

Now one can agree with one of German’s points, that Corbyn should not do a “deal” with May on Brexit.

But this?

That we can “break through the Brexit cloud which hangs over British politics at present, and can hopefully unite those on different sides of the divide”?

By campaigning for a People’s Brexit  that few have heard of and those that have have most have already forgotten the phrase.

No chance.

We can agree that fighting austerity policies is Labour’s Number one priority.

But nobody, nobody, can imagine however “hopefully” that there is unity when she calls for the very issue, Brexit, and her group’s support for it, can be thought away by other campaigns.

How exactly are they going to “fight” Farage, one might ask, if all they can say is, “we want a better Brexit than you do!”

Brexit was, is, and will be, the key issue, and Counterfire stands with the Brexit side.

Many would consider that Counterfire, and the Lexiters more widely, underestimate not the potential electoral support for Farage, but the political basis for the ‘red-brown’ alliance. This includes people in the ‘left’ Full Brexit, as well as the media promoted (from the BBC to Sky) Spiked (ex-Revolutionary Communist Party).

National populism has its ‘left’ wing with these links, and it also has its brown wing, clearly on the far-right.

This mixture, is known in France, where there are plenty of examples of such a bloc, is “confusionism”.

Yesterday brought news from the ‘brown’ side of this alliance.

Nigel Farage is facing strong criticism from Jewish organisations and a series of other groups after it emerged he repeatedly took part in interviews with a far-right US talkshow host, during which the Brexit party leader openly discussed conspiracy theories, some of which have been linked to antisemitism.

A Guardian investigation has found Farage has appeared at least six times on the show of Alex Jones, who was sued by bereaved parentsafter claiming a US school shooting was faked, and was banned permanently from Facebook last week.

In his various appearances on Jones’s show, Farage discussed themes commonly associated with an antisemitic conspiracy theory that Jewish financiers are behind a plot to replace nation states with a global government.

In the six identified interviews, which date from 2009 to last year, Farage, whose Brexit party is leading polls for the upcoming European elections, repeatedly uses words and phrases such as “globalists” and “new world order”, which regularly feature in antisemitic ideas.

In the interviews, Farage also says:

  • Members of the annual Bilderberg gathering of political and business leaders are plotting a global government.
  • The banking and political systems are working “hand in glove” in an attempt to disband nation states.
  • “Globalists” are trying to engineer a world war as a means to introduce a worldwide government.
  • Climate change is a “scam” intended to push forward this transnational government.

One minute it’s former leftist Claire Fox citing Shelly’s Rise like Lions in the service of National Populism. The next it’s full conspi Bilderberg stuff.

The nutter pictured above is probably a lot saner than this lot.

Morning Star (Communist Party of Britain), Says “Strong Case” for Not Voting Labour and Boycotting European Elections.

with 4 comments

Image result for alex mayer

Labour Candidate for the East of England, Alex Mayer. Morning Star suggests “active” campaign not to vote for her.

Should we boycott the Euro elections?

Editorial Morning Star.

In a rambling editorial, which begins with the reflections that, “today the Italian people celebrated their Festa della Liberazione, which marks the overthrow of fascism which set in train the establishment of a social republic based on the value of labour.” the mouth piece of the hard-line pro-Brexit on WTO terms Communist Party of Britain Morning Star suggests the following,

There can hardly be a more suitable candidate for the Brussels talking shop than a motor mouth Trotskyite turned right-wing libertarian.

The election for which these oddballs present themselves is wholly illegitimate. But it presents real dangers for Labour if the party presents itself exclusively as the anti-Brexit party which some appear to want.

One of Labour’s candidates, the SDP turncoat and Blairite privatiser Lord Adonis, has advised Brexiteers not to vote Labour. The millions of working-class voters who voted Brexit in the June 2016 “people’s vote” might well take him at his word.

There is a strong case — rooted in a respect for the people’s democratic instincts — for an active boycott of this unnecessary, irrelevant vanity parade.

In other words, don’t stand up to the far right.

Don’t stand up for internationalism.

This is the group that this little lot backed during the last European elections: No2EU – Yes to Democracy. 


2014 31,757 Decrease 0.19% Decrease


I shall be campaigning for comrade Alex, one of the best candidates in the coming election

Labour announces Euro candidate list for East of England

Posted by Alex Mayer on 19th April 2019

Alex Mayer MEP said: “For as long as Britain is in the European Union we need British MEPs standing up for the people of Norfolk, Suffolk, Essex, Hertfordshire, Bedfordshire and Cambridgeshire. Only this week I was in the Parliament voting for research funding, for better rules on sustainable finance and to improve working conditions for people on zero hours contracts.

I am delighted to head a strong team of Euro candidates. We will fight for local investment, action on climate change and cracking down on tax dodgers.”

The full list of Euro candidates for the East of England is:

1. Alex Mayer MEP


Written by Andrew Coates

April 26, 2019 at 12:06 pm

Socialist Left Moves to Back People’s Vote on Brexit Deal.

with one comment

Theresa May’s abject failure in negotiating a deal with the EU means that the public must have a fresh say.

Mayor of London’s call for people’s vote adds to pressure on Jeremy Corbyn.

More than 100 anti-Brexit motions, and motions backing another referendum, or people’s vote, have been submitted by constituency parties – believed to be a record for any single issue in the party’s recent history.

A large number of the motions are from the left of the party, and call for a commitment to a people’s vote to be inserted into Labour’s next general election manifesto.

Sam Tarry, national political officer of the TSSA union, who used to work for Corbyn, said the left of the Labour party was uniting behind demands for another vote: “The sheer weight of anti-Brexit motions going to conference is unlike anything I have ever seen – and the only force in the Labour party capable of pulling that off is the left. The trade union movement has moved quickly towards an anti-Tory Brexit position this summer. There is this feeling that we, the socialist left, simply cannot stand by and watch while workers and communities are sacrificed at the altar of Tory dogma and imperial nostalgia.”

Until now Corbyn and the shadow chancellor, John McDonnell, have said they would prefer the public to be given a say on Brexit in a fresh general election, adding that, if one does not happen soon, the option of a second referendum should remain open. But leftwingers in the party now say this formula is not sufficient, and want a commitment to another referendum in the next manifesto.

Alena Ivanova, a leading activist for the grassroots group Momentum in east London, said: “This is a campaign now being led by the left… Tory Brexit is a fundamental threat to the rights and prosperity of working-class people and the communities that Labour represents, driven by bosses and rightwing ideologues. We will only stop it with unashamed leftwing internationalism and, crucially, that will also help us in the campaign to get the Corbyn government we need.”



One of the parties backing such a motion is Ipswich.

In a debate last week at the All Members’ meeting this motion  was endorsed. It was just past the deadline for formal inclusion in the above list, but will be the basis for our Conference Delegate to support.

Motion – to be moved by Andrew Coates:

Oppose Tory Brexit and win a radical Labour government.


This CLP supports the earliest possible election of a Labour government led by Jeremy Corbyn. The current government is putting Tory Party dogma first, not jobs first – and they have no mandate for their agenda”

“We call on the Labour Party to:
1. Oppose any Brexit deal that does not satisfy Labour’s 6 tests.
2. Call for an immediate general election, and make a manifesto commitment to call a public vote on the Brexit deal with an option to remain in the EU if the public rejects it.
3. If we cannot get a general election, to campaign for a public vote on the deal with an option to remain in the EU; and following a defeat for the government, to call for animmediate general election.
4. To place radical social and economic policies at the heart of our programme of government – taxing the rich and big business to pay for better public services, rapidly expanding common ownership, abolishing anti-union laws and engaging in massive public investment.

Delegates from this CLP to Labour Party conference should vote in line with this policy.”

This received overwhelming support from all sections of the party, with one vote against and a couple of abstentions.

Image result for march for the many people's vote liverpool

Written by Andrew Coates

September 16, 2018 at 11:58 am