Starmer and Evans should be held to account for their conduct

David Evans and Keir Starmer. Montage: ITV

JVL Introduction

As this blog post makes clear, Labour leader Keir Starmer is on record as accepting there was nothing in the EHRC report to suggest that his predecessor was antisemitic. And yet Jeremy Corbyn has been suspended by David Evans with Keir Starmer’s enthusiastic support for saying nothing that he did not say before the report appeared.

What is going on?

The author, chair of a Constituency Labour Party, has asked us to publish this without further attribution.


On 30th October Keir Starmer accepted that there was nothing in the EHRC report to suggest that Corbyn was antisemitic. Asked whether he believed Corbyn was himself antisemitic, he said: “I don’t see Jeremy Corbyn in that light. Neither did the commission report make any findings, individually, about things that Jeremy had said or done.”

Starmer nevertheless justified and endorsed Corbyn’s suspension in these terms:

“I made it clear the Labour Party I lead will not tolerate antisemitism, neither will it tolerate the argument that denies or minimises antisemitism in the Labour Party on the basis that it’s exaggerated or a factional row… That is why appropriate action was taken yesterday by the general secretary in suspending Jeremy Corbyn. That’s the right action – very difficult action, but the right action, which I fully support.”

That’s clear enough. Jeremy Corbyn was suspended by the General Secretary for saying that the level of antisemitism within the Labour Party was exaggerated.

Starmer confirmed this in other interviews that day and was happy to intervene in the process of the suspension with his unqualified endorsement: “That’s the right action…which I fully support”.

What did Corbyn actually say?

Here is the statement for which Corbyn was suspended:

“Antisemitism is absolutely abhorrent, wrong and responsible for some of humanity’s greatest crimes. As Leader of the Labour Party I was always determined to eliminate all forms of racism and root out the cancer of antisemitism. I have campaigned in support of Jewish people and communities my entire life and I will continue to do so. The EHRC’s report shows that when I became Labour leader in 2015, the Party’s processes for handling complaints were not fit for purpose. Reform was then stalled by an obstructive party bureaucracy. My team acted to speed up, not hinder the process.

“Anyone claiming there is no antisemitism in the Labour Party is wrong. Of course there is, as there is throughout society, and sometimes it is voiced by people who think of themselves as on the left.

“Jewish members of our party and the wider community were right to expect us to deal with it, and I regret that it took longer to deliver that change than it should.

“One antisemite is one too many, but the scale of the problem was also dramatically overstated for political reasons by our opponents inside and outside the party, as well as by much of the media.

“That combination hurt Jewish people and must never be repeated.”

On television the same day Corbyn referred to a 2019 poll indicating that the public believed one third of Labour Party members were antisemitic. He pointed out that in fact, the Party’s investigation of all allegations showed that the true figure for those accused of antisemitism was 0.03%. Again, Corbyn was arguing that the level of antisemitism within the Party had been exaggerated. Within 6 minutes of that broadcast the Party released a statement that Corbyn had been suspended.

What did the EHRC report say on this

The EHRC Report (ch 3 page 26) states:

“Article 10 [Human Rights Act 1998] will protect Labour Party members who, for example, make legitimate criticisms of the Israeli government, or express their opinions on internal Party matters, such as the scale of antisemitism within the Party, based on their own experience and within the law.”

Jeremy Corbyn’s right to express a view on the scale of antisemitism within the Labour Party, based on his own experience, is explicitly safeguarded by the EHRC Report. His suspension from Party membership is clearly in breach of this right.

Starmer on the EHRC report

Starmer has stated categorically, repeatedly, that the Labour Party stands by all the findings and recommendations of the EHRC report. Yet in publicly justifying and endorsing the suspension of Corbyn, Starmer has contradicted himself. Moreover, he has contravened the European Convention on Human Rights which was incorporated into U.K. law under the Human Rights Act 1998. In so doing, Starmer has violated what he proclaimed to be Party policy, with respect to the EHRC report.

We are at liberty to ask, should Keir Starmer and General Secretary David Evans now be held to account for their conduct, pending an investigation? That conduct has denied Jeremy Corbyn and other Party members their fundamental rights, as defined in U.K. and international law. Furthermore, it has contravened the EHRC report, provoked thousands of members to resign their membership and brought the Party into disrepute.

Moreover, the unjust yet swift disciplinary move on Corbyn, imposed within hours of the fabricated transgression, is in stark contrast to the utter failure to hold to account those senior staff who – according to the leaked internal report – were responsible for dilatory efforts between 2016-2018 creating a massive backlog of complaints regarding antisemitism; made racist and misogynistic remarks about leading party members; and sought to sabotage Labour’s 2017 General Election campaign.

Not only that but these individuals were awarded huge payouts earlier this year, without awaiting the result of the party’s own inquiry into the leaked report under Martin Forde QC. UNITE general secretary Len McCluskey commented at the time: “Today’s settlement is a misuse of Labour Party funds to settle a case it was advised we would win in court.”

As a starting point, the suspension of Jeremy Corbyn should be lifted immediately and an apology to Jeremy from Keir Starmer and David Evans be issued forthwith.

And if the leadership is prepared to disregard those elements of the EHRC report it finds politically inconvenient, it must at least take note of the reaction of many party members who are demanding the right to submit the report to the critical scrutiny of the democratic structures of the Party.

Comments (53)

  • Wonnie says:

    What a great description of the ridiculous corner the party has painted itself into.

  • Bill Jefferies says:

    It’s the end game I’m afraid. Witches do not exist and yet they are hunted. Starmer intends to drive all socialists from the party. The choice of whether to stay or go is entirely moot. It has been made for us. Time to prepare for life outside. Personally, I can’t wait.

  • Martin Kernick says:

    Nothing will happen unless someone takes Evans and Starmer to court.

  • B says:

    I totally agree with this author and I think it’s appalling that it must be unsigned for self-protection – as I will ask for my comment to be. Stalinism is a word I’ve heard from others several times today in response to this censorship and I agree with that too. We can all write to Evans and Starmer individually though. This is an intolerable violation of rights, especially Jeremy’s, and must be opposed.

  • Simon Dewsbury says:

    A human rights lawyer who doesn’t seem any longer to understand human rights. Tony Blair took 8 years to get to his ‘weapons of mass destruction’ moment and completely alienate a large section of the Labour Party membership. Starmer appears to have achieved this in 8 months.

  • Mark Smithson says:

    What a superb article and so true. Many have been saying this since 2016 including myself to the annoyance of my local MP who on many occasions threatened to report me for anti-Semitism, even going so far as to give my personal details to a reporter from the Jewish Chronical who was aggressively questioning me the reasons for signing the letter published in the guardian. Along with questioning my heritage and calling me an anti-Semite for supporting Jeremy, now this support and that of many others has been validated. It’s time the likes of Starmer and Evans admit they were wrong all along.
    They also need to act with equality for all forms of racism especially in the leaked report into the actions of some to stop Labour winning the 2017 and 19 elections. I’m guessing that that report will be quietly brushed under the carpet hopeful that member with forget.
    There needs to be equal action to all not one rule for those who follow the right and a totally different set of rules for those on the left. If this doesn’t happen the mass exodus of left leaning member will continue until there are no socialist left in the party. Changing it forever would be a bad thing. Let’s hope that Starmer listens & takes in the issues he’s created

  • Edward Hill says:

    The Board of Deputies “Statement following third meeting between Jewish community leaders and Labour Leader Keir Starmer” November 4 2020 begins: “We thanked Keir Starmer and the Labour Party for their firm and constructive response to the damning verdict delivered by the Equality and Human Rights Commission last week.
    We expressed our disgust that his predecessor Jeremy Corbyn had, by contrast, responded by diminishing and dismissing the legal findings of the report, thereby challenging the Labour Party’s new commitment to rooting out the problem and giving the Party no choice but to suspend him.” They add: “Calls for leniency on the basis of party unity are misplaced when the issue at hand is antisemitism.”
    Keir Starmer made an apology to the Board of Deputies immediately after winning the leadership contest; he will not want to have to do so again, over failure to expel Jeremy Corbyn on the grounds of bringing the Party into disrepute.

  • Tony Riley says:

    Very funny.

    That “leaked” report failed to include any emails or texts between the Corbyn cabal.

    I wonder why.

    Don’t be a bunch of cowards, like this person: print this.

  • Charles Train says:

    Even if he is right in thinking that enemies of the Party exaggerated the extent of antisemitism , Jeremy for the sake of Oarty unity should apologise forhis remarks and then his ridiculous suspension should be lifted.
    Pride could get in the way of this but hell Jeremy needs to be pragmatic about this issue.

  • Me again says:

    Of course Evans/Starmer must reinstate Jeremy. With thousands of others, I signed petitions, attended online rallies etc. in support of his reinstatement. When last I looked, the petition had reached nearly 30,000 signatures. The previous petition signed to reinstate Rebecca L-B received well over 20,000, but nothing changed and is unlikely to this time. Evans/Starmer just ignore it; they have washed their hands and rub them with glee at our misery, our fury, our betrayal.
    Remember how in the advent of the leadership election, Starmer was loath to reveal his campaign donor? We know who he was. A man who, for years, has crucified democracy with wads of cash. There’s no way Corbyn will find himself where he was.
    Unless…….? Is there a plan? Seems not, we’re supposed to just stick with the Party, however repulsive the leader.

    Whatever, the rules must change; politicians must stop accepting large sums in exchange for certain policies and certain behaviours. Though Politics, policing and media have become more and more corrupted and how do you stop clandestine bribery. Ten days ago, hearing George Osborne, panelist on Any Questions, say, ” Jeremy Corbyn was catastrophic for our democracy”. I remember, George, when you got some media flak for partying on oligarchs’ yachts. No big deal now. Par for the course – and worse, who cares about climate change when oil barons proffer favours; or mass murder for arms dealers’ invitations?

  • Janet Crosley says:

    Thankyou for a succinct and brief summary of the situation. I do hope it can be given to the MSM.

  • Emma says:

    Excellent,thankyou for this article.I agree Mr.Corbyn should be reinstated,he should not have been suspended and is owed an apology.I hope it happens sooner rather than later.Mr.Corbyn has done nothing wrong to justify such a suspension.

  • Paul Leach says:

    “…the utter failure to hold to account those senior staff who – according to the leaked internal report – were responsible for dilatory efforts between 2016-2018 creating a massive backlog of complaints regarding antisemitism;” The truth of this is established not only in the internal leaked report but in the Shipman-endorsed chronicle of the saga “Left Out”- (“a first draft of history unlikely….to be bettered”). From a reading of the book and of both Reports it’s there in plain sight what’s been exaggerated: Corbyn’s culpability; and what remains undifferentiated and minimised: that of the old guard in positions of power in the party until 2018. The suspension is not only a contravention and an injustice, but politically insulting to the aspirations of 10.3 million people who voted for Corbyn’s Labour party. Starmer’s move may delight Corbyn’s vengeful detractors but attacking his left flank didn’t help Neil Kinnock one bit come the next election.

  • Harry Law says:

    But he said that on antisemitism he was prepared to take action against those who also “pretend it exaggerated, it doesn’t really exist.. it’s only factional.”
    Sir Keir also said it had not been a “political decision” by general secretary David Evans to suspend Mr Corbyn. And he made clear he strongly supported the action against his predecessor.
    “In those circumstances I think it is very important to take tough decisions. It wasn’t a political decision. It was the decision of the General Secretary.”
    A report last weekend had claimed Baroness Chakrabarti and Unite’s legal chief Howard Beckett were helping the former leader to develop his strategy in challenging the suspension.
    I don’t want to see any Labour Party money or time tied up with yet more legal cases. I will talk to Shami about this when I next see her.” https://www.thejc.com/news/uk/starmer-vows-to-talk-to-chakrabarti-about-claims-she-is-preparing-corbyn-defence-1.508422
    Starmers many lies about Corbyn and his breaching of the LP rule book and Equality Commission report are documented by Alex Nunns here.. https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2020/11/02/starmer-lied-over-corbyn-the-ehrc-and-anti-semitism-shouldnt-he-quit-as-labour-leader-now/
    BUT! The General Secretary being involved in disciplinary matters is, according to the EHRC… (drum roll)… political interference. The report explicitly defines the General Secretary’s Office (GSO) as one of “the Party’s political organs.”

  • Dave Bradney says:

    Jeremy has been suspended (on what grounds? Was there actually a complaint laid?) because of something he chose to say in response to the EHRC report. I think it is safe to assume that he had seen the text of the report in advance. In which case it is surely no accident that the remark he made was couched in the exact terms that the report itself said should be guaranteed as legally protected. In which case we should probably just wait for the case to be heard, plus any appeal, plus any consequent legal action. While calling, of course, for a speedy resolution to this highly unusual and most unfortunate case.

    In the words of Stevie Wonder:
    “I don’t even have to do nothin’ to you,
    You’ll cause your own country to fall.”

  • Helen Richards says:

    And what next if they refuse? Isn’t it time to consider legal action?

  • Deirdre Baker says:

    It seems to me that the huge payout to the saboteurs at Labour Party HQ was not compensation but actually a wage for a job well done.

  • Dai Foster says:

    Evans is currently subject of a formal complaint for bringing the Party into disrepute by taking this action in contravention of article 10 of the Human Rights Act & by flying in the face of the EHRC Report.

  • James Simpson says:

    I’m not a Labour party member, but it looks as if your leader and general secretary are bringing their party into disrepute by acting against their own rules against Jeremy Corbyn. Shouldn’t they be suspended from membership pending an inquiry into their conduct?

  • Nick Jenkins says:

    What I really don’t understand is what is going on in the minds of those who want to perpetuate the myth that the Labour Party is dangerous to Jews. Who benefits? We have heard of the hurt and distress that has been caused to Jews by stories of Labour Party antisemitism – but surely continuing to promote the narrative of “a tidal wave” of antisemitism simply prolongs that pain unnecessarily?
    That the accusations were overstated is self-evident.
    The Jewish press colluded in describing a future Labour government as “an existential threat” to Jews. This can only mean it would put Jews in physical danger. Keir Starmer would have been part of that government. Does he accept the party’s aim was to do that? Does he believe, as Simon Heffer stated, that Corbyn wanted “to reopen Auschwitz”?
    If not, he must accept instead that accusations of Labour antisemitism were overstated. And that inevitably means exonerating Jeremy Corbyn.

  • Hazel Davies says:

    I am making a formal complaint against Keir Starmer and David Evans on the grounds outlined above, with full documentation from the EHRC report. I consider the paying off of those actually responsible for not acting on complaints of antisemitism is in itself a form of indirect antisemitism.

  • Sylvia crowe says:

    Shocking attempt to get rid of the most unbiased leader the Labour Party has had in many years I don’t think Starmer has anywhere near the high moral standards of JC4PM

  • Harry Law says:

    Starmer said anybody who claimed complaints of anti-Semitism against Labour were “exaggerated” has “no place in the party”. Shortly afterwards, Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party membership was suspended. Starmer backed away from this act, leaving his new general secretary, David Evans, to justify it. He could not. He provided no evidence that Corbyn had broken any Labour Party rules and could not show that Corbyn had said anything that was not – in fact – accurate.
    The EHRC report corroborates Corbyn’s claims – and also shows that his right to make them is enshrined in law – in his human right to free speech.
    I noted that Starmer has today tried to justify Corbyn’s suspension, telling the BBC’s Today programme ,”I made it clear the Labour Party I lead will not tolerate anti-Semitism, neither will it tolerate the argument that denies or minimises anti-Semitism in the Labour Party on the basis that it’s exaggerated or a factional row.”
    This is only going to make it worse because it is a lie. Corbyn didn’t deny or minimise anti-Semitism on that basis. His claim that is was exaggerated is true, as shown by the EHRC report. And he didn’t say it was a factional row – just that “opponents” used to to cause problems – and again this is accurate.
    https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2020/10/30/starmers-meltdown-he-suspends-corbyn-and-splits-the-labour-party/
    The number of members expelled from the Labour party in 20018 was 10
    The number of Labour party members expelled in 2019 was 45.
    https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/13434_20-Statistics-Report-No-Place-For-Antisemitism.pdf
    The total membership around this time was approx 550,000.
    This works out at 0.01% of the total membership. Corbyn is correct, it is Starmer who is exaggerating and doing so to denigrate Corbyns leadership, and to demonstrate how tough he is to the BoD and those who backed him for the leadership contest. In my opinion there will be blood on the walls before Corbyn is allowed back in the Labour party, Corbyns scalp is too important for Starmers continued leadership, indeed as far as the BoD,CAA and JLM it is concerned, it is either Corbyn or Starmer who has to go, Starmers position would be untenable with Corbyn still a member.

  • Sabine Ebert-Forbes says:

    Brilliant article, my answer to the question is a simple and resounding Yes!!! Mr Evans’ and Mr Starmer’s actions are totally out of order, in my view illegal. They need to have a whole library thrown at them, not just the book. And we want Jeremy Corbyn fully reinstated and they need to apogize and in my view resign.

  • Pete says:

    My daughter, who is half – jewish, has torn up her membership card, saying she has more important things to deal with in her life and the world. That people were more concerned with doing anything to bring down Jeremy than to win an election shows what is wrong within the party. It takes me back to the ’60s’ when people would stand by their principles even if it meant losing the election.

  • Thomas Spencer says:

    Fully support this statement!

  • Iain Crawford says:

    Corbyn was suspended six minutes after he spoke on television about EHRC report.
    How can an official complaint be raised, proper people consulted, sent to GLU approved etc in that time. That’s not credible.
    It was plainly planned in advance or the result of a Temper tantrum with no procedures at all. If they have documentation it will have been compiled retrospectively.
    It is quite likely Corbyn’s suspension is invalid never mind unlawful.
    A court case would force disclosure of all these details with the sanction of prosecutions for perjury or contempt if not truthfully complied with.
    No wonder Starrmer is running scared.

  • George McManus says:

    PLEASE CORRECT. Jeremy didn’t say 0.3 of members had been investigated. He said 0.03. This is the difference between 1,740 members and 174 members. This is crucial to his point that AS is grossly overstated.

  • Bernard Grant says:

    Jeremy was correct on his comments. The evidence has been overwhelming. Starmer is trying to eliminate the Left. We are not a Dictatorship Party.

  • Barry james Thomas says:

    EHRC ? Seems only for the anti semitism problem in the Labour party? No look into islamophobia in the Conservative party? Why is “SIR” Starmer apologising to the BOD ? Why was there never a mention of the Shai Masot scandal again? Israeli control of the Labour party complete with the former director of public prosecutions? Labour must disband to stop the power grab under the smokescreen of a pandemic!

  • susan Hubbert says:

    Starmer has said that he wishes to end factionalism in the party but has done the very thing to encourage it. We must all hang in there. If we resign ‘they’ have won and the idea of a future with socialism will be no more.

  • Jacob Ecclestone says:

    As far as I can recall this is the first time JVL has published an anonymous article. That troubles me. The JVL website has a reputation for honest and informed political debate, tolerance and courage. Although I am sure the decision to publish an anonymous article was taken only after careful thought and much debate, it has none the less opened a gate which you may find it difficult to close.

    The natural assumption on reading this article is that the writer has asked for anonymity because he or she does not want to run the risk of being removed as chair of his/her Constituency
    Labour Party. That assumption may be wrong; there may well be other, more private and personal reasons for wishing to remain anonymous. In the absence of any indication to the contrary, however, we are entitled to assume that the writer’s identity has been withheld for political reasons.

    If we have now reached the point where – only seven months into his tenure as leader of the party – Keir Starmer is able to intimidate into silence those who disagree with his policies and authoritarian methods, or force them into electronic samizdat, then we should all be worried. When members of the Labour Party are deterred from speaking openly on matters which go to the core of democracy, then we are into the realms of “thought police” and “double speak”.

    I now believe that Keir Starmer is a danger to the Labour Party itself, to the right of members to speak freely and to our human rights. I think he should be removed.

  • john regan says:

    I AM 67 this month, 50 years of Labour membership except when Blair and Mandelson hi-jacked the party. Trying to bend it to their view of what a socialist party should be. A party without any socialists .That MP FROM Hartlepool bragging that there was not a day that he did not do something to undermine MR Corbyn. Any way my point in all those years that i have been involved with the party i have never come across any Anti-Semitism,I have often come across racism on many occasions But this does not seem to matter.

  • RITA WALKER says:

    Has you know we have Made quite a lot of strong comments about the disgusting way that a man of good standing in the Labour Party like Jeremy Corbyn and His family have had to suffer over the last few weeks from his own Party most so Sir Starmer and David Evans who must have been waiting to do this to him. Just because in my eyes Starmer would never be able to hold a candle to Jeremy, and the word rivalry was the deed. Nothing else. And it is time we all stopped pussing around and Reinstated Jeremy Corbyn immediately. But at the same time we think a new Leadership is now needed, because when they have tried to stop Freedom of Speech in our meetings that does say to me we all need a new Leader and someone who will take the Conservatives on and make them accountable for what they are doing to our Country, after all we are the opposition Party not an extra arm of the Tories. We have four years to start getting it right and we now demand a vote of no confidence in Sir Starmer be placed. And let us get going in our fight for Justice when covid is over.

  • Allan Howard says:

    George McManus said that Jeremy didn’t say 0.3% of members had been investigated, but 0.03%. That may well be the case, but in several newspaper articles that I happened to read, they definitely had it as 0.3%, and there was just one article I came across that had it as 0.03%. Given the MSMs proclivity to distort, I’m inclined to accept the 0.03% figure, although I don’t know where it comes from, and in so far as I can vaguely recall the figures, it doesn’t seem to fit with those Jennie Formby made public last year – ie the 174 figure that George mentions, that is. But then neither does the 1,740 figure.

    In the final analysis I don’t think it much matters, because Jeremy was just pointing out and drawing attention to the massive disparity between the public perception of the size of the problem, and the actuality.

    PS I thought I’d just do a quick search on the Guardians website to see what figure THEY referred to, and I ended up going through four related articles, and didn’t come across any mention of a figure at all! I then checked out the Independent and – fortunately for me! – they mentioned a figure in the first related article I clicked on, albeit 0.3%!

    I just quickly checked the Daily Mirror, and THEY have it as 0.3% too!

  • Charlotte Peters Rock says:

    Starmer and Evans should be sacked from the Labour Party, ‘for bringing the Party and its Membership into disrepute, and for further paying away its money and its reputation, and for deliberately compromising both the EHRC and Forde Inquiries by those actions.’

  • Angie Hudson says:

    The only back way for Starmer is to reinstate Corbyn and rightly blame Evans ( whose appointment has not yet been ratified by conference as required by party rules), who acted outside of his authority as secretary of the NEC. They were meeting that same evening and as he is responsible to them should have consulted before action. He also failed to manage the disciplinary process according to party rules, (which we are now all familiar with) due to a serious breach of confidentiality. The press knew about the suspension before Corbyn. His actions undermined the leader who was keen to promote the report, caused loss of membership, thereby loss of campaigners and income , so has undermined the party’s viability and therefore cannot be trusted with the parties best interests. In summary he has bought the party into disrepute and must either resign or the NEC must sack him. I suggest we recommend this course of action to the NEC ASAP.

  • Jaye says:

    Never a fan of Corbyn, nor his views on Israel, but his suspension is ridiculous – he quoted a statistic. Bernard Grant above correctly observes: “The evidence has been overwhelming. Starmer is trying to eliminate the Left. We are not a Dictatorship Party.”

    Starmer, by acting like a successful coup leader who shoots every previous leader or competitor, risks tearing the party apart. There are no real policy issues involved in this act, just personal .. he said, but we said etc … and I don’t understand Starmer’s behaviour assuming he wants to broaden his appeal, lead Labour to power and become PM. Unless he’s more interested in broadening his appeal to Tory-inclined voters only.

  • steve mitchell says:

    Our country is in a moment of grave danger. Democracy itself is threatened. Even High Court judges and the security services are warning of the danger the Far Right poses. There are Tory ministers who are supportive of neo fascists in Hungary and Poland. Ministers who are members of extreme right wing outriders both here and in America. At this moment the Labour Party which was the only institution capable of opposing this has chosen to render itself impotent. Alas, this is self inflicted injury. Right wing members have and are assisting the extreme Right . They have ensured the real changes the people of this country need are as far away as ever. The preposterous allegations of anti semitism are partly responsible. Getting to the truth of this conspiracy is of paramount importance. Labour cannot move forward .There can be no reconciliation until the accusations are tested in a court of law. Corbyn must NOT apologize. He has been the victim of the most contemptable character and political assassination in modern times

  • Harry Law says:

    The Witchfinder General [Starmer] has succeeded in claiming the scalp of Jeremy Corbyn, he has done this by completely rejecting evidence, due process, and the presumption of innocence and the complete evisceration of the Labour party rule book. Worse still he is in the process of destroying the Labour party by calling the past 5 years an aberration and using Corbyn as a scapegoat, or, as Margaret Hodge would prefer “Corbyn is yesterdays man, he is absolutely irrelevant” [BBC news].
    The destruction of Jeremy Corbyn and his followers needs to be completed, Starmer and his henchmen will now threaten MP’s and members with the terrors of the earth if they support Corbyn or even fail to denounce him with sufficient vigour. What is happening in today’s Labour party is straight out of Arthur Millers play ‘The Crucible’ when denial of being a Witch was itself proof of one’s guilt. People are scared of discussing Israel/Palestine for fear of being pounced on by the LP compliance unit [or its latest incarnation] see George Wilmers correspondence https://www.jewishvoiceforlabour.org.uk/article/the-labour-party-inquisition-a-case-study/
    Jeremy Corbyn has been denounced and abused by many in his own party, by the MSM and various Jewish groups the BoD, CAA and JLM, at times Corbyn himself has been his own worst enemy. Corbyn needs to now fight back using all means necessary including court action. It will be difficult because of all the above, failure to do so will see Corbyn’s name and his supporters go down in history alongside all the other villains in history and ensure the Labour party’s retreat into authoritarianism and future irrelevance

  • Mary Wyatt says:

    Rather than just write to David Evans make a complaint against him using the official Labour Party form – see [email protected] There is a section where you can make a complaint against a paid official.

  • Jeff Bowler says:

    We all know that Starmer needs to ditch the real leader as he treacherously stabbed him in the back.,
    Criticism of The Israeli government is not anti Semitic it is anti fascist. Starmer knows this but is now in thrall to the same so has to pretend outrage.
    The Labour Party is I’ll served with such a weak and treacherous head.,

  • James Dickins says:

    The 0.3% figure for antisemitism in the Labour Party (discussed by some commenters above) comes from Greg Philo and Mike Berry’s book Bad News for Labour: Antisemitism, the Labour Party and Public Belief. For a discussion of the figure, see: https://www.jewishvoiceforlabour.org.uk/article/bad-news-for-labour-a-response-to-channel-4s-factcheck/

  • Edith Dyas says:

    This latest development within the Labour Party is beyond belief. I have long seen Starmer as a traitor to the Labour Party, and a pseudo member of the Tories, but this latest vicious attack on the Labour Party’s, is unforgivable. Corbyn has been the best leader the Party has had since the days of Harold Wilson, another leader who was vilified beyond belief by the Tories. As a simple rule of thumb, if the Tories attack someone without mercy, it is an indication that the person they attack is a major threat to them, and must be removed by any means possible. In this case JC has been attacked not only by the Tories, and the Jewish Board of directors, but also by traitorous members of his own Party, and finally, unbelievably by the man who was elected by Labour to replace him as leader, and also by, the not yet confirmed, Party Secretary, David Evans. Both Starmer and Evans, in their eagerness to banish JC have jumped the gun somewhat! Maybe the genuine members of the Party can use their unseemly eagerness against them, and demonstrate to them that they are no longer welcome in the real Party!

  • Martyn Meacham says:

    Starmer should resign, and buy a one way ticket to Israel, and Evans should be sacked.

  • Maria Goodey says:

    Our Politicians seem to think that they are above being called to account for actions that harm the country and the integrity of democracy and our country. I would suggest that they have to brought to book or I fear our country will be destroyed. Its already a shadow of what it was. Reinstate a man of morals(Jeremy Corbyn) to his rightful place.

  • Steve Griffiths says:

    It comes down to whether you resign from the Labour Party, or stay and fight. Court action is an irrelevance: this is a civil war in a party in which Starmer represents a minority. If we all leave, that will give us exactly what he and his friends in the media want. I think Starmer and Evans have already committed a number of actions, documented so well by this website, that are contrary to the letter and spirit of Labour Party rules, show extremely bad faith, and are worthy of a totalitarian state. Even within the constraints that Evans has set, a no confidence motion is viable and necessary, no confidence in both of them. The alternative is despair. I remind myself of the 200,000 annual unnecessary deaths due to health inequality. People need a democratic, just and determined Labour Party. I will not have it stolen. If I am expelled, I will still be a pain in the arse. For example, we desperately need a mass movement for democracy in this benighted country. But there’s no future for a new political party. We are still the biggest party in Europe. It’s tragic and ludicrous that we have got into this position. Starmer is weak and has made surprising mistakes. The parliamentary party is largely a rump. It’s the media that scares the hell out of me: that’ll be a long war, in the Labour Party and out of it, but if life’s worth living, we have to take it on. Let’s fight for democracy. For ourselves and for millions of lives already destroyed.

  • Geoff Parker says:

    It’s quite clear that Evans and Starmer are pandering to the right-wing of the party by suspending the clearly innocent Jeremy Corbyn ! This crime against his human rights is also a warning to the remaining membership that such rights no longer apply under the “New Leadership “. We must therefore unite behind Jeremy and immediately correct this disgraceful misuse of power!

  • R Moore says:

    I hang my head in sorrow that this labour leader, who was voted in by promising to keep to some of his predessor’s policies would stoop to this? When I read what J.Corbyn had actually said after that report I cannot see why he was suspended? He clearly stated that any anti semiticism was too much and surely stating the correct figure (0.03% not 1/3rd as prev. understood by people who do not know how to read percentages) is not to reduce the severity of anti semiticism but correcting a misconception? Has the world gone mad? I wonder if Starmer would have got in if he had told of his intentions when running for leadership? Many voters did not have a clue.

  • Paul Stidder says:

    I believe Jeremy Corbyn should be allowed back in shame on Labour Party

  • Peter Wingate says:

    Well, there is little to be added to the above article other than to say that it is correct in all it’s conclusions. I therefore endorse the statement.

  • Alan says:

    Shame on Starmer and the traitorous beaurocracy at LP HQ have they no regard for truth, honesty, integrity and equality.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Read our full comment policy.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.