Broxstowe Constituency Chairman Purged by New Labour

Yesterday Mike posted up another piece about a prominent Labour figure, who has now been purged by Ian MacNichol and his New Labour goons. This is Peter Radcliff, the chairman of Broxstowe Constituency Labour party. Mr Radcliff has been told that he’s been suspended because he is a member of AWL, which Owen Smith denounced as a far left organisation that was infiltrating the Labour party. Mike points out that AWL is miniscule. Moreover, Radcliffe has been a member of the Labour party for 35 years, which means it’s a bit late for any to scream anything about infiltration in his case.

Perhaps the real reason is that in 2014 he submitted a motion to the Labour party conference urging the renationalisation of the NHS. Conference rejected it. Mike also suggests that this may not be about AWL entryism, but about the fact that Mr Radcliff’s constituency party protested against the attempt by Labour MPs to overthrow Corbyn without the membership having a vote on it. They also protested against the imposition by the New Labour bureaucracy of the freeze date of January 12, to stop people joining after that date from being able to vote in the leadership election they wanted to prevent.

Mike also reports that a personal friend of Vox Political has also been suspended on the grounds that she was in breach of rules regarding recruitment’. And that’s it. She’s issued a Subject Access Request for all information on the case, but it won’t be cleared up until after the election. Which is why it’s been done at this time.

Mike concludes:

Add it all up, together with the other shenanigans we’ve seen over the summer, and it seems there has been some spectacular skulduggery by people currently occupying positions of responsibility which they appear to have abused.

I know Jeremy Corbyn is keen on conciliation but this cannot be allowed to continue.

After the leadership election is over, it will be time to decide what to do about these people.

The article is at http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2016/09/11/labour-offends-another-constituency-party-by-expelling-its-chairman/

Go and read it, and be annoyed.

I am also appalled at the way the Labour party conference turned down a motion for the renationalisation of the NHS. The current bankruptcies and cuts in the Health Service are a direct result of its piecemeal privatisation, a privatisation that began with Maggie Thatcher and was massively accelerated by Tony Blair and New Labour. Private healthcare is massively more expensive than state healthcare, more inefficient and discriminates against the poor, the disabled and long term sick. It’s profoundly revolting that the party, which set up the NHS, should now be backing its destruction. This incident is also ominous as shows what might happen if New Labour get their way with the forthcoming Conference. Labour First, another Blairite entryist group, has been contacting right-winger to get them to pack the Conference in order to stymie the left-wingers present, and make sure it blocks any left-wing policies and frustrates Corbyn’s leadership.

This is what New Labour, Ian MacNichol and the 172 MPs involved in the coup represent: the destruction of the welfare state, the privatisation of the NHS, and misery and poverty for the poor, the unemployed and the working class. They stand for the absolute betrayal of everything the Labour party was founded for. It is time their power was broken, and they were made to respect the wishes of the majority. If they cannot, they should leave the party and go to their natural home in the Tories.

Advertisements

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

2 Responses to “Broxstowe Constituency Chairman Purged by New Labour”

  1. Blissex Says:

    «This is what New Labour, Ian MacNichol and the 172 MPs involved in the coup represent: the destruction of the welfare state, the privatisation of the NHS, and misery and poverty for the poor, the unemployed and the working class.»

    Unfortunately that is quite popular with the rentier/affluent middle classes of southern england. After all that’s the Conservative platform, and they got a plurality of votes and a majority of seats.

    Some parts of the right then mistakenly argue that the party should ignore its traditional low income/renter constituencies,. and some parts of the left then mistakenly argue that the party should ignore those affluent/rentier middle classes.

    Neither should be ignored, but a programme should be found that has elements that please both potential voter groups. The Conservatives manage to buy the affluent upper-middle class vote with very little, and then enact legislation policies favourable to the upper classes.

    «they should leave the party and go to their natural home in the Tories.»

    Their natural home is the Liberals: culturally progressive, economically conservative. Except that since the benefits vote last year the Liberals (and Ian Duncan Smith…) are positioned to the left of New Labour.

    Both Labour and Conservative are coalitions: of a segment of the Whiggish upper-middle classes with the Tory upper classes the Conservatives, and of a different segment of the Whiggish middle classes with the socialdemocratic lower classes for Labour.

    The problem is that there is no large party of the centre, as R Seymour wrote,

    http://www.lrb.co.uk/v37/n08/richard-seymour/bye-bye-labour
    «The essential fallacy of British politics is that there is a large centre ground, and that this is where elections are decided. As Nick Clegg has discovered to his cost, in a period of economic depression this area has a tendency to shrink.»

    BTW I agree with the author that the centre is small; and that’s why the Whiggish middle classes attach themselves to Conservatives or Labour. But I think that even if small it is indeed where elections were decided. Currently as many point out given that 40% of eligible voters don’t vote elections are decided by turnout of the core vote of each party.

    • Florence Says:

      It seems you may not have long to wait, as rumour has it that Blair is indeed trying to found a new party (or should that be a New Party?), with Sainsbury’s money being redirected from Progress to the New Blair Party. I have no doubt at all that this will claim to hold the middle ground as long as the ideals of neoliberalism seem centrist and “moderate”. I also have no doubt that this is yet another attack on the working people of the UK.

      Let’s just stick with the current Labour party, that has promised to represent the 99%, and not the 1%?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: