Your Party elections and what the results mean for members

On 26 February, Your Party members decided who would sit on the Central Executive Committee (CEC). The election results rolled in just before lunchtime. Jeremy Corbyn’s team ‘The Many‘ secured 14 successful candidates, giving them a majority on the CEC. In contrast, Zarah Sultana’s ‘Grassroots Left’ saw 7 gain a seat with three independent candidates completing the CEC.

However, questions remain about what this means for the ‘peoples party’. Will this mark a line in the sand and prompt genuine efforts to work together? Or will factionalism double down, leaving sore winners and resentful losers across the political divide?

Jeremy Corbyn, his slate, and his team have faced considerable member backlash for controlling and divisive tactics that have turned what was once an exciting project into a toxic, polarised environment. After all, not letting people have a say or seat at the table is bound to increase suspicion and provoke defensive actions from those blocked out. This resulted in accusations of toxic ‘Labour Right’ tactics being rampantly deployed in a fight for a small few to control the process.

The Many must remember that cheering a victory for one faction will sting those who backed the other. That’s hardly a recipe for bringing people together.

Party politics and factionalism putting off members

Despite the party having had a reported interest of 800,000 people following the announcement from its co-founders last July, that transpired to approximately just 60k members at the time of its inaugural conference. The announcement of results today informed that membership now lies at 40,985, with just 25,347 votes received to decide the party’s pivotal direction of travel. Not a great indictment on how either leader has read the room, with factional games undeniably having a role in the loss of enthusiasm among the wider public.

For instance, losing nearly 20k members after the conference could either be due to the public fighting and briefing, in which both sides were at odds with each other. Corbyn’s team deplorably chose to brief the right-wing press about ‘communist takeovers’ prior to it commencing, drawing accusations of similarities shared with the ‘Labour Right’ intrinsic in his downfall.

Unfortunately, this has highlighted that public leaders have not sufficiently taken note of public feeling: and that is that there is no time to waste fighting with each other with the far-right at our door.

One Your Party member despairingly told us:

How can we win people over from the far-right if we can’t even navigate disagreement together on the left?

At the Canary, we have faced relentless abuse and criticism for insisting on transparency and holding those in power to account. Yet we have refused to back down, because we believe all power deserves scrutiny — not just the power of those we oppose. After all, power corrupts, and humans are fallible.

The left must get it together

From the very outset, members made it abundantly clear that one of the most important factors in building this party was the safeguarding of democracy. When so many are left feeling unheard and sidelined, this party was meant to be the salve that healed that wound by allowing all engaged to be heard. This led to pushes for a member-led democratic party, which was overwhelmingly voted through at conference.

However, since then we have received multiple reports supported by verified evidence which informed the suggestion that Corbyn and his team were more than happy to subvert democracy for their own desire to control the party building process. Considering reports from the outset of Sultana being blocked from contributing equally, seemingly preferring for her to be seen and not heard, a significant proportion of members have raised alarm over patriarchal ‘sexist man club’ attitudes inherent in The Many.

We wrote earlier this year about Corbyn ally Karie Murphy’s shady tactics to fix the odds, saying:

Originally, members of Your Party made it clear that they wanted an elected oversight committee formed ahead of the CEC election. Supporters argued that this approach would make committee members more representative of the entire membership, bridging divides and differences of opinion.

However, figures on The Many slate allegedly objected, instead pushing for – and implementing – a sortition process that selected five members to carry out crucial oversight. Given the public bickering and clashes driven by strong views on both sides, members generally accepted this compromise as fair in principle.

However, it now appears that principle and process are not the priority for those gearing the party’s democratic processes.

The Canary has been told that Karie Murphy excluded one sortition member from being involved in the Your Party committee, literally blocking her number and ignoring her very existence.

Advertisement

Corbyn to be Your Party’s ‘parliamentary leader’

It is being widely reported that the significant TM-majority on the CEC will elect Corbyn to be Your Party’s representative in Parliament. This undoubtedly raises questions as to whether this victory for TM will be used to force a sole leadership model that members overwhelmingly voted down at its inaugural conference. It equally raises fresh concerns that what will unfold now will be akin to the ‘Labour Right’ jostling for power, excluding and sabotaging others in the process, to create a party in their image alone.

Not too unlike the warnings we heard from Sultana that a Labour Party 2.0 was awaiting if her slate and aligned independents didn’t win a majority.

An unavoidable dichotomy has surfaced: if members voted for collective leadership to ensure that decisions are made fairly with no centralised power in the hands of one person, it’s hard now to see how that really can be delivered upon. Those aligned solely with Corbyn’s TM slate have made it abundantly clear they wanted sole leadership from the start. Equally, they have made clear in practice that they won’t work in tandem with people who aren’t on ‘their team’. Now they have control of the party’s decisions, it’s impossible to avoid the optics of the birth of a ‘Labour 2.0’.

This is especially true when we consider the briefing and ‘attack dog’ sabotage tactics that belong firmly in the Labour right playbook.

Undoubtedly to cause frustration among members, we have a sole leader with a majority overseeing the foundational processes of a party formed on a collective leadership model. Square peg, round hole springs to mind.

Something that it appears Zarah Sultana alludes to in her public statement after the results were announced:

Change comes from uplifting people, not suppressing them

In conclusion, Corbyn and those aligned with him would do well to remember that the vast majority of the public watching this unfold are likely more emotionally mature than those in powerful, privileged positions. Equally, Sultana’s team will have a tricky line to tread, yet again, where they maintain scrutiny on how much power the members actually have, whilst not being seen to be the ’cause’ of people losing interest.

The vast majority see that we have to hear each other to find a way forward, not shut the door from the very outset if we don’t like what we’re hearing. This has unsurprisingly put people off and hindered the movement as a whole.

Nevertheless, Corbyn and his allies have achieved victory and the ‘control’ that comes with it. We hope they choose now to listen to all of us without fear or favour. How he chooses to wield this control will have wide-reaching consequences for YP members, and the viability for the party to truly compete against the rising far-right.

Featured image via the Canary