Leave a comment

31/08/2018 by socialistfight


SHAMEFULLY! Editorial, The Socialist 23-29 August 2018

“Shamefully, the trade union leaders Dave Prentis of Unison, Tim Roache of the GMB and Paddy Lillis of the Usdaw jumped on the bandwagon of insinuations against Corbyn from those organisations and other sources, by repeating some of their allegations and calling on Corbyn to accept the entire IHRA definition.

These right-wing union leaders argue that adopting the full definition is a necessary step towards creating unity in Labour and retaining support from the ‘Jewish community’.

Len McCluskey speaking at an NSSN rally 10.9.17, photo Neil Cafferky   (Click to enlarge)

Unite general secretary Len McCluskey, on the other hand (!!!), has intervened from a welcome pro-Corbyn standpoint, arguing that Labour isn’t an antisemitic party and pointing to the plotting that has been taking place by Blairite MPs towards forming a breakaway party.

He has rightly recognised that: “the more Corbyn has personally sought to build bridges [towards those attacking him], the worse the rhetoric [against him] has become”. So his hope, expressed in the same article, that another attempt to conciliate with the right by accepting the IHRA definition in full could enable the party to ‘move on’, will not be realised.” [1]

NOT SO SHAMEFULLY??? ITV News, 16 August 2018

“Mr McCluskey said the “more Corbyn has personally sought to build bridges” with the Jewish community, “the worse the rhetoric has become”.

He added: “What is the response from the leading Jewish community organisations to this record of reaching out, of understanding, and of action? Intransigent hostility and an utter refusal to engage in dialogue about building on what has been done and resolving outstanding difficulties.

“I therefore appeal to the leadership of the Jewish community to abandon their truculent hostility, engage in dialogue and dial down the rhetoric, before the political estrangement between them and the Labour Party becomes entrenched.”

Mr McCluskey, calling for the IHRA definition to be adopted, said: “Clearly, it would have been far better for the party to have adopted at least ten of the eleven IHRA examples in their original wording.

“Not doing so – and particularly without adequate consultation – was insensitive and bound to lead to misunderstanding, and also served to distract attention from the real issues at stake.

“It would be for the best if all eleven were now agreed, so the party can move on.”

But he warned there remained “free-speech problems” with the example concerning “Israel as a racist endeavour”. ” [2]


[1] Editorial, The Socialist 23-29 August 2018,

[2] ITV News, 16 August 2018, Union boss McCluskey calls on Labour to adopt IHRA definition of anti-Semitism,

Leave a Reply

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

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

WRP Explosion

WRP Explosion

WRP Explosion

%d bloggers like this: