‘DISGUSTING”, “pathetic”, “undemocratic” – Labour supporters hit out last night after the party announced it will spend members’ cash to block them from voting in the leadership election.
Five party members won their High Court bid to overturn a ban on “new” members having their say on who should lead the party.
The crowdfunded challenge was brought after Labour’s National Executive Committee (NEC) froze all those who signed up after January 12 out of the process unless they paid an additional £25.
Shadow chancellor John McDonnell called the result – which affects around 130,000 people – a “huge victory” for members.
However, the party then provoked fresh outrage by announcing it will appeal.
Writing on Twitter, one member said the move was “undemocratic”, another called it “disgusting” while another branded it a “pathetic attempt to circumvent democracy” amid calls for NEC chairman Iain McNicol to resign.
Others hit out at officials for “wasting members’ money” just days after the Electoral Commission revealed that the party’s massive membership surge had led to a record income of more than £51 million last year.
By 5pm yesterday, more than 6,000 people had signed a petition on the change.org site urging the party to abandon the appeal.
Hannah Fordham, one of the five members who brought the legal challenge, wrote: “When we joined the Labour Party, we were told we would be able to vote in any leadership election.
“After the national executive committee ruled that we weren’t allowed to vote, we took the decision to challenge its decision in court. We crowdfunded our legal costs and the High Court has now recognised our right to vote.
“We are urging the Labour Party to respect democracy and not waste members’ money on trying to prevent a quarter of its membership from voting.”
Fordham, 27, also urged supporters to keep donating to the crowdfunding appeal, which had reached more than £30,000 by yesterday evening.
However, Labour insisted it was right to “defend vigorously” the decisions of the NEC, stating: “The procedures committee of the NEC has decided that the Labour Party will appeal this ruling in order to defend the NEC’s right, as Labour’s governing body, to uphold the rule book, including the use of freeze dates.”
Leadership challenger Owen Smith announced his bid to replace incumbent Jeremy Corbyn after the Labour leader lost a vote of “no confidence” among MPs by 172 to 40.
Angela Eagle, who launched a bid of her own, withdrew following abuse said to have come from Corbyn supporters.
The High Court ruling was seen as a major boost for Corbyn, who was already the bookies’ favourite thanks to his popularity among Labour’s grassroots.
Odds in his favour improved again yesterday, with 1/10 falling to 1/16 at William Hill and 1/6 to 1/10 at Coral.
Ballot papers were due to be sent out from August 22, but the court’s decision has thrown up the prospect of delays due to the number of additional papers needed and efforts to prevent those new members who paid the one-off £25 voting fee from voting twice. Unless it wins its appeal – expected to be heard on Thursday – the party also faces the prospect of refunding those who paid the additional fee.
Smith called for the contest to be extended following the ruling to allow him time to “engage” with voters, but resisted calls to urge against the appeal, saying it would be wrong to “interfere” in the committee’s decisions.
He said: “Whatever the rules are, I am just going to play by them and continue to make my case. At the end of this I am confident that I can persuade the Labour Party that I am the right man to lead us, not just in opposition, but into government.”
McDonnell said of the court’s ruling: “This is a deeply disappointing decision by a small clique of people behind closed doors, many of whom have openly expressed their opposition to Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership, who are now trying to use Labour members’ money to fund what they think is a further attack on Jeremy.
“We are a democratic socialist party – you cannot have one without the other. I hope Labour HQ rethinks this decision as it could leave a legal bill in the hundreds of thousands of pounds that we could be spending instead on campaigning to hold this Tory Government to account.”
A senior Labour source said the case could determine McNicol’s future, stating: “If Labour loses the appeal, the position of Iain McNicol becomes untenable.”
The membership case comes after Corbyn defeated a separate legal challenge to prevent his name from appearing on the ballot paper automatically.
The outcome of the leadership contest will be announced at a conference in Liverpool on September 24.
Yesterday, Tory chairman Sir Patrick McLoughlin took aim at the official opposition, saying: “This summer, the Labour Party have held more High Court battles than leadership hustings. At a time when the people of Britain look to a party who will fight for them and their families, Labour are spending their summer fighting among themselves.”
Michael Gray: UK Labour cannot 'win back Scotland' with empty talk of federalism
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here