Guilt by association thrives in Starmer’s Labour

JVL Introduction

Mike Cushman, JVL’s membership secretary, has been expelled (or in the Party’s dystopian words, ‘terminated’) by the Labour Party.

This came as little surprise to him as they first started investigating him in 2017. The first three investigations were based on claims that things he had said and written were antisemitic. When Mike challenged their interpretations, the Disputes Team realised how unsustainable they were and did not pursue them further.

The fourth attempt falsely alleged that Mike was a member of LAW, Labour Against the Witchhunt. When he pointed out this was untrue and asked for evidence they resorted to alleging “support for a proscribed organisation”: guilt by association. The Party claims an unchallengeable right to define what constitutes support, even when support for an organisation is absent, unconstrained by fact or logic.

Mike knew that in due course he would be terminated and no longer allowed to attend to the minutiae of minutes, matters arising and social event organising that comprise Party meetings, in the absence of now forbidden robust political debate on the issues that concern members.

We reprint the final set of charges against Mike, his response and their decision.

1. The charges received on 30 January

Chapter 2, Clause I.5.B.v of the Rule Book provides that the following constitutes a Prohibited Act:

Possessing membership of, providing financial assistance to, sitting on the ruling body of or otherwise supporting (as may be defined by the NEC) any political organisation that the NEC in its absolute discretion shall declare to be inimical with the aims and values of the Party. [emphasis added by Labour Party]

In your response of 3 August 2023 you state “I am not and never have been a member of [Labour Against the Witchhunt or Resist]”. Having reviewed the evidence we have better particularised the allegation, as set out below, to make it clearer the different incidents which could constitute support of Labour Against the Withchunt (sic) if proven on the balance of probabilities.

Allegation 1: Support for Labour Against the Witchhunt, 2018 to 2021

Between 2018 and 2021 Mike Cushman supported Labour Against the Witchhunt in breach of Chapter 2, Clause I.5.B.v of the Labour Party Rule Book by:
a) On 30 March 2018, signing a petition organised by Labour Against the Witchhunt.
b) On 15 May 2018, speaking at launch in London organised by Labour Against the Witchhunt and others
c) On 24 September 2019, speaking at the Labour Against the Witchhunt Fringe Meeting outside of the Labour Party Conference.
d) On 14 January 2020, signing a petition co-sponsored by Labour Against the Witchhunt.
e) On 20 July 2021, speaking at a lobby of Labour Party HQ organised by Labour Against the Witchhunt and others.
f) On 28 September 2021, speaking at the “RESIST! event which was organised by Labour Against the Witchhunt and others.

Copy of the notice of Allegation

2. Mike’s response sent on 5 February

I do not dispute the veracity of the examples but I do challenge the interpretation you put upon them. I am committed to the importance of open political debate in society generally and inside the Labour Party in particular. We will not develop our ideas if people are scared to speak. I am also passionate in defence of adherence to natural justice in all domains. The tragedy insufficient care and attention to fair process causes can be seen in the pain inflicted in cases from Orgreave to Hillsborough to Windrush to Horizon.

There is good evidence that allegations of antisemitism in the Labour Party have been used to suppress free speech and pursued through abuses of natural justice. You may believe I am mistaken but that we differ in our understanding is not sufficient reason for disciplining me for reasonably held beliefs. Allowing these, and the contrary views of others, into debate would, in my opinion, improve the health of Party culture and strengthen its right to lead national and local government.

I did not support Labour Against the WitchHunt with whom I have, for this purpose irrelevant, political differences. We do however have points of agreement and I was pleased to be able to use the opportunities they gave me in instances where our views overlapped to promote my, not their, views on matters of concern. You will not find me on the record, or for that matter off the record, as having supported LAW as an organisation.

Because of the fear induced by overstated allegations of antisemitism in the Labour Party and elsewhere, platforms for advancing arguments around freedom of speech on Palestine and Israel are highly restricted. I am not able to pick and choose and reject invitations provided by the few organisations and venues who have the courage to host them. It is important to recognise that I am not being investigated for anything I have said or any views I am assumed to hold, only for whom I am alleged to support. This is guilt by association, a tactic that had its natural home in the US House UnAmerican Activities Committee and should have no place in the Labour Party

For the record it is not my view that the Labour Party is free of antisemitism. We exist within a society that is pervaded by discriminatory and prejudiced beliefs and these beliefs infiltrate our Party. However, it is my view, based upon my own observation and considerable well validated research by others, that antisemitism is neither the most significant problem of bigotry facing the Party nor is the Party the locus of the greatest problems of antisemitism. The disproportionate attention paid to it, both by our enemies but sadly also by some elements inside our Party, has played a major part in denying our country the Labour Governments it desperately needs; a view that is validated by the findings of the Forde Report. The EHRC in their report on our Party explicitly stated that expressing an opinion on “the scale of antisemitism within the Party” is covered by Article 10 of the ECHR.

If it is your view that advancing arguments for free speech and natural justice are incompatible with membership of the Labour Party I think it says more about an erosion in the morality and integrity of the Labour Party than it does about me.

I also find the way you have pursued this allegation distasteful. The way you have substituted one claim with another suggests you have decided a priori to pursue me because I am a vocal and well known Jewish anti-Zionist. You appear to have scrabbled around for anything to aid this pursuit. You have gone back to 2018 and presented nothing more recent than 2021, all of which was available to you before the previous allegation. The three to six year delay suggests that my membership of the Party has not been a threat to our electoral chances or reputation, otherwise you would have taken more urgent action.

3. The termination notice received on 6 March

A panel of the National Executive Committee (the NEC Panel) met on 04 March 2024 and considered all of the evidence that the Party put to you and any evidence submitted by you in response.

The NEC Panel then made findings of fact and then applied the Rule Book to those findings. We have set out the findings of the NEC Panel below.

Summary of the Findings of the NEC Panel
Support for Labour Against the Witchhunt, 2018 to 2021
The NEC Panel had regard to the written representations of Mr Cushman submitted and received on 03 August 2023 and 05 February 2024.
The NEC Panel found that Mr Cushman had been an initial signatory to a Labour Against the Witchhunt petition on 30 March 2018; that he had spoken at an event organised by Labour Against the Witchhunt and others on 15 May 2018; that he had spoken at a fringe meeting of Labour Against the Witchhunt on 24 September 2019; that he had signed a petition co-sponsored by Labour Against the Witchhunt on 14 January 2020; that he had spoken at a lobby of Labour HQ organised by Labour Against the Witchhunt and others on 20 July 2021; and that he had spoken at the “RESIST!” event organised by labour Against the Witchhunt and others on 28 September 2021.
The NEC Panel considered that Mr Cushman’s conduct demonstrated, in its opinion, the type of support for Labour Against the Witchhunt prohibited by Chapter 2, Clause I.5.B.v of the Rules

Consequently, your membership of the Party stands terminated. You are no longer entitled to attend any Party meetings or to exercise any other rights associated with membership of the Party.

Copy of the termination notice

A note on the subject access request submitted to the Party

Mike submitted a subject access request to see all the documentation held by the Party referring to him. The Party eventually supplied an extensive dossier. Surprisingly, none of the items in the dossier referred to any discussion of a decision to investigate him, even in a highly redacted form.

It would seem that a member of the disputes team arrived at work on the morning of 30 January spontaneously and without consultation or prior discussion decided to issue a notice of allegation. When Mike queried this with the Party’s data controller he received no response.