Labour’s libel settlement has plunged the party further into factionalism
The antisemitism row that dominated Labour’s image during the Corbyn years came to a head this week. Seven former HQ staffers, as well as BBC journalist John Ware, were awarded financial compensation and an unreserved apology for defamation after an expose on the party’s antisemitism scandal aired.
There were numerous accusations by said staffers that senior Labour officials and key Corbyn aides undermined head office’s attempts to deal with rampant antisemitism in the rank-and-file. However, in a recent counter-attack dossier, many senior recruits in the party’s operational hub were alleged to have wilfully pursued an anti-Corbyn strategy ahead of the 2017 election. They did so by ignoring antisemitism complaints so to blame the former Labour leader of being complacent and unfit to lead the government’s opposition.
The dossier’s revelation of “hyper-factionalism” amongst the party’s senior role-holders has led to an inquiry being led by Martin Forde QC. The outcome of this inquiry is scheduled for later this year. Therefore, it is unscrupulous that Labour has failed to adhere to the Forde inquiry before reaching a fair agreement with Ware and the former staffers. New Labour leader Starmer’s knee-jerk reaction with financial settlements has only heightened cynicism surrounding his leadership and the direction he’s taking the party post-Corbyn. With his bold vision for “unity”, Starmer has instead allowed factionalism to take precedence.
The consistent blame game against Corbyn with his failure to lead the party to power has only infuriated his resounding base in the membership. Starmer grasped power by removing the pillars of Corbynism from the shadow cabinet and head office. Outspoken Corbynites, some who believed fervently in Starmer’s promise for transformative socialism during his campaign, have now been silenced. Their pleas for the Forde inquiry to be heard has been diminished with the settling of the libel case. What happens if Forde concludes that ‘hyper-factionalism” categorically enabled antisemitism to flourish to eventually lead to Corbyn’s demise?
Corbyn responded to the settlement by labelling the decision a “political one, not a legal one”. He followed on by calling for “transparency and accountability” that “all members have a right to”. With his statement came outcry from the Corbynsceptics and other factional groupings. The most vociferous Corbyn critic, Margaret Hodge MP, called his intervention into the libel case “bizarre”. Meanwhile, Starmer-appointed Shadow Foreign Secretary Lisa Nandy said Corbynista’s were “completely wrong” to condemn the hurried decision. For those who were inspired by Corbyn’s tenure, with the likes of Unite leader Len McCluskey, rallied round the former leader and stood in solidarity with his displeasure.
The libel case just proves that the battle for the soul of the Labour party rages on. The funds used to settle the case were from the membership fees of so many who felt emboldened by Corbyn’s quest for change. His successor Starmer, comforted by the centrists, could face jeopardy if he continues his marginalisation of the hard left. Although the party’s poll numbers have improved considerably under Starmer, he has inherited a socialist membership that is vital for his success.
All eyes are now on the Forde inquiry delivering scandalous information on the undermining of Corbynism. The steps that Starmer takes in dealing with this is questionable. For factionalism not to prevail under his leadership, a lot more needs to be done to quell the distrust coming from the left. A broad church encompassing all members is the only way for the party to move forward. The soft left and centrist recalcitrance with their progressive colleagues allows the ongoing civil war to cause more calamity. Come 2024, the art of factionalism could be decisive or abysmal for Starmer’s Labour party.
