I am very sorry. I am aware my posts are already fairly long and was just concerned that more information would put people off. But you are right ofc. LTW stands for Labour to Win. It is the slate of candidates that stood in the most recent NEC elections. LTW are a new group formed out of the collaboration between two moderate pressure groups in the Labour Party; Progress and Labour First, who regularly propose candidates for NEC elections

I apologize too for giving things for granted

@Matt Wilson

I mentioned Osamor because Edmonton CLP voted to open the selection last year in the trigger ballot. Then the election was called and the NEC reselected Osamor because there was no time to run the full selection.
However, it must be said that with the new” 2/3 threshold of branches” system to be reselected, it is easier to “trigger” than with the old system. Diana Johnson’s and Hodge’s cases showed those triggered can then comfortably win the open selection.

My understanding is that the reasons Osamor was triggered are not related to national politics but to internal local factions. Enfield Labour is a bit of infighting mess.

The affliated union branches now have a say to which wasn’t the case previously and therefore again may be fairly influencial

Thanks for the clarification. I guessed that about LTW. I think it’s better to have longer posts and be clearer than shorter and unclear.

The general election left a big “what might have been” in terms of deselections.

“The affliated union branches now have a say to which wasn’t the case previously and therefore again may be fairly influencial”

I suppose one can argue both ways.

In the old version of the trigger ballot, Labour MPs were reselected if 50.1% of the local party branches voted to automatically reselect them and not to trigger a contest. Ward branches and affiliates branches were summed together.

In the new trigger ballot, sitting MPs are triggered if 1/3 of party branches OR 1/3 of affiliates branches asked for the open contest.

So yes, union branches have more say as the affiliates can trigger a contest on their own.

On the other side, in the past, unions voted for reselection of almost everyone (with some few exceptions in the recent past) anyway and in some cases the union brnaches outnumbered the party branches. For example Roger Godsiff used to have 15 union branches (9 of them being GMB) affiliated to Sparkbrook CLP vs 4 ward branches. So unions could have been used to prevent members from deselecting. Now it wouldn’t be possible.

Perhaps very unfortunately timed is the report into Labour Party infighting which will be published in coming weeks. It’s understood that the wide ranging remit has the unintended consequence of finding significantly more than HQ had expected. Could add to what is already a messy affair

Is it linked to the leaked report? I found that online and it made very interesting reading (just skimming – it’s very long).

The investigation came about because of that report

Lord Desai becomes Starmer’s first Parliamentary resignation unsurprisingly citing the recent decision to readmit Corbyn

Rather typical I would say, for someone who’s been sitting in a fundamentally undemocratic place for 29 years, to take a stance that is fundamentally undemocratic.

I’m fairly surprised that he resigned now given Corbyn was leader for 5 years and is now a backbencher. There were half a dozen peers who did resign under Corbyns leadership but as far as I’m aware he was not one. I suspect a few have held out under the delusion all will alright again under new management

Lord Desai must be a very old man indeed by now….he was my tutor at LSE in the mid-90s and he seemed geriatric 25 years ago. Even by the standards of an elite university he seemed very much the embodiment of an eccentric academic, complete with untidy office etc, but was very well informed indeed about applied economics in the UK in the heavy industry sector (decline of the coal and steel industries etc), and comes across as a very moderate Labour man, I’ve always had a soft spot for him.

My limited knowledge of Desai from friends also implies he’s a very genial person.

I’m sure he’s a nice man…I’m saying someone so establishment as him it’s not a surprise. Also I believe theres some sort of alignment going on between pro Israeli govt ppl and pro Modi ppl. In otherwise…Lefties and Trots in Labour …shut up about Israel! Shut up about Kashmir!

Matt…”..wide ranging remit has the unintended consequence of finding significantly more than HQ had expected.”. Have u got any more on this and can you indicate your source.

Yeah here’s a link to the guardian article below:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2020/nov/22/labour-infighting-inquiry-damaging-starmers-position

I myself have contributed to the inquiry

“Also I believe theres some sort of alignment going on between pro Israeli govt ppl and pro Modi ppl.”

What I notice about Indians I know in London (mostly working in well-paid City jobs) is that they are fairly un-religious though nominally Hindu, and quite disparaging about Modi despite being almost certainly Conservative voters in UK elections. In other words there is a big similarity between them and their British/European counterparts in such professions in having fairly liberal social views together with conservative views on economics. It’s much less easy to be a nominal muslim, I imagine.

One thing in Sajid Javid’s favour is that he isn’t religious – with his money and status, that’s easier for him to do than many other Muslims, I imagine.

60 Constituency Labour Parties have passed motions concerning Corbyn, no confidence in Starmer or the General Secretary or disagreeing with the guidance issued by the GS re what CLPs can discuss. As a result executive CLP members have been suspended in a number of CLPs. Angela Rayner has said 1,000s of members will be suspended if need be though the party has issued a clarification that 1,000s of members won’t be suspended for passing such motions