Starmer’s proposed party rule changes are an anti-democratic outrage | Owen Jones

Starmer’s proposed party rule changes are an anti-democratic outrage | Owen Jones

Keir Starmer, Labour

9/22/2021 11:29:00 PM

Starmer’s proposed party rule changes are an anti-democratic outrage | Owen Jones

The Labour leader’s plans to give members less say over his successor seem motivated by a fear of the left, says Guardian columnist Owen Jones

, and more than six in 10 of all voters do not think he seems like a prime minister in waiting. This is a man sinking fast, in desperate need of a life raft. His last real opportunity to offer a compelling vision to a hostile nation arrives at the party’s upcoming conference. So it may seem baffling that Starmer has instead decided to focus on bitter internal party wrangling by

reverting to the old rulesfor electing his successor, which will grant MPs far more say over who becomes the next Labour leader than grassroots party or trade union members.When he informed his shadow cabinet of the plan to replace the “one member, one vote” rules with an “electoral college” system dominated by MPs,

Starmer justified iton the basis that Labour needed to look outwards to potential voters rather than to its members. “If members had been listening to that meeting, they’d have cancelled their direct debits right there and then because what’s the bloody point,” one Labour figure attending the meeting told me. According to multiple sources,

'I got engaged to my cousin and only realised through a family history class'

the architects of the proposed rule change include Starmer’s former chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, who ran Liz Kendall’s doomed leadership campaign in 2015; his former political secretary,Jenny Chapman; and political organising manager Matt Pound. They have privately justified the proposed change of rules as a way to prevent a Jeremy Corbyn-style successor.

Starmer’s pitch in the 2020 leadership election was to unify the party. As his former aide Simon Fletcher wrote recently, if the leader had proposed to “return to the MPs’ golden vote” during that election, he would have been “comprehensively defeated

”. How much Starmer shares the ideological commitments of his factional operators is unclear. Many Labour MPs and aides are adamant that he is a technocratic lawyer with “no politics”, but there is also a broad consensus he is thin-skinned, as prone to rage over critical leftwing tweets as jibes from Boris Johnson. Some suggest this character trait has been ably exploited. Others think Starmer does not understand the magnitude of what he has agreed to, and that those pushing for this change have taken advantage of the leader’s naivety to introduce new rules that leave him vulnerable to a leadership challenge from the right.

Young mum who was gang-raped is beaten and paraded in front of jeering crowd

In practice, Starmer is a blunt instrument of the party’s rightest-most edges. MPs on the party’s right remain bedevilled by the same problem that led to the rise of Corbynism in the first place. They have no compelling policies for modern Britain, a defect they failed to rectify during the years they spent in the political wilderness. Instead they are defined purely by their antagonism towards the left.

In the shadow cabinet only Andy McDonald, the shadow secretary of state for employment rights, spoke against the change of rules. He argued that conference was about “presenting a vision to the country and unifying the party behind it, and this will do the exact opposite”. McDonald has spent the summer hammering out an ambitious programme of policies on employment rights with the deputy leader Angela Rayner’s team, while Ed Miliband’s operation has been pushing the leadership to take a more radical stance on the Green New Deal. All this will now be buried under an avalanche of factional spite. This is why Starmer’s new head of strategy, the pollster Deborah Mattinson (herself no leftwinger), argued against the changes, believing they would make conference into a show of internal wrangling.

Traditionally, those on Labour’s right argued that divided parties did not win elections. They portrayed the left of the party as obsessed with gaining control and defined solely by what it opposed. This narrative now seems to define Starmer’s operation. Many of Starmer’s supporters were burned by the experience of the 2015 leadership election – in which

Plus size model defies fat-shaming trolls by losing 2.5st and flaunting figure

Kendall, who was widely regarded as theLabourright’s candidate, suffered catastrophic defeat. Some likely believed that Starmer’s competent reputation, combined with promises of party unity and radical domestic policies, was their route back to power. Yet whether on migrants’ rights, raising taxes on the wealthy or maintaining a broad church within the party itself, his tenure has seen these commitments abandoned in practice. Instead of presenting a vision for the country, those pushing to change the leadership election rules seem to believe that defining the party against the left will reap electoral dividends, even though pressing the ultimate nuclear button – suspending the former leader in 2020 – did no such thing.

Read moreSeveral senior Labour figures have been confused by Starmer’s acceptance of the proposals, highlighting the leader’s terrible personal ratings and the fact many Labour MPs have not moved against him purely because they fear the possibility that – under the existing electoral system for deciding the leader – he could be succeeded by someone to his left. The move to an electoral college would neutralise that concern. (Indeed, some Labour MPs and aides believe that figures around Starmer are prepared for the possibility he will be succeeded by a figure from the party’s right, such as the Blairite torchbearer Wes Streeting, who has been put forward for numerous broadcast interviews and newspaper profiles.)

Previous attempts to rewrite leadership rules have been consulted on for months, not bounced into existence days before the party conference. Those who are pushing this through are doing so because they fear a general election is imminent in which the leader will lose badly, and they need to control who succeeds him. Union leaders can stop this: while Unite has already expressed its opposition to the change of rules, the other two main unions – Unison and GMB – can rebut the farcical claim that giving MPs a whip hand in determining the next leader restores power to them.

And here is the tragedy. As one MP who formerly supported Starmer said, the sole aim of those around the leader is to “bury the left forever”. In place of a vision for the country is a vacuum filled by the Labour right’s determination to crush the left. The party’s forthcoming conference is set to be a showcase of internal division instead of an opportunity to set out a vision for the nation. For those on the Labour right who believe the leader is already a dead man walking, this is their comfort zone. For Tories planning a snap post-pandemic election, opportunity awaits.

Owen Jones is a Guardian columnist

Read more: The Guardian »

OwenJones84 Great article from Owen. The right wing in Labour know Starmers days are numbered and this is an attempt to shut the door on the party’s left for good. If this goes through it is pointless for the left to remain in a party whose leadership despises them. OwenJones84 It has been left to Mandelson to explain Starmer’s politics, that he wants to return to the yNew Labour ground and win from the centre and centre right. This is what has been expected. For voters across the broad left the message is to take your subs and your votes elsewhere.

The Guardian: showing contempt for women and Jewish people by continuing to employ the abusive misogynist and anti-Semite Owen Jones... the centrists and tories hatred of owen is not the only thing they have in common it seems OwenJones84 Off you pop then Owen 👋 Irritating article written by an irritating OwenJones84. Giving greater weight to Parliamentary Labour Party votes in leadership contest is not anti-democratic. The PLP members represent 1000s of voters. In 2010, 160k new affiliates & members joined for £4 in the final 24hrs!

No they're not.

Our Yorkshire Farm's Amanda Owen admits 'cramming' her nine kids' birthdays into one partyAMANDA OWEN and her husband Clive share nine children who they raise on the idyllic Ravenseat Farm, however, the Our Yorkshire Farm star has revealed their birthday celebrations aren't as picture-perfect.

'Don't judge' Amanda Owen hits back over fan's cheeky comment about ‘dressing up’ to farmAMANDA OWEN has responded to a fan after they sent her a cheeky comment about her appearance.

Our Yorkshire Farm’s Clive Owen had to hold Amanda down during ‘terrifying’ first birthOUR YORKSHIRE FARM star Amanda Owen opened up about her traumatic first birth of her oldest child, Raven. The 47-year-old detailed how her husband Clive was ordered to hold her down in the hospital so an epidural could be administered.

The Breakdown | Eddie Jones’ 2023 gamble: England’s new dream team or too many cooks?There will be plenty of new faces when England’s training squad convenes on Sunday, not least the arrival of some eye-catching coaching appointments

Alex Jones fears she won't 'make it' for The One Show return just weeks after giving birthALEX JONES has shared her concerns that she won't 'make it on time' ahead of her return to The One Show this evening, which comes less than a month after giving birth to her baby daughter Annie.

'You horrible man!' Neil Jones scolded by Strictly partner Nina Wadia during rehearsalsNEIL JONES was branded a 'horrible man' by his Strictly Come Dancing partner Nina Wadia, as the pair worked hard during rehearsals today.