Labour party

Sarah Champion, the Labour MP for Rotherham, was one of the Labour frontbenchers who resigned in an attempt to force Jeremy Corbyn to quit as Labour leader. But today, she has asked for —and been given — her job back. I can assure you I've not joined any coup, just think Jeremys position is no longer tenable if we're to be effective https://t.co/EiNhp2KH14— Sarah Champion (@SarahChampionMP) June 29, 2016 Now, Champion was just a frontbencher, not a full member of the shadow Cabinet. But her un-resignation is another straw in the wind suggesting that things are moving in Corbyn’s favour. Champion’s willingness to return to the front bench suggests that

The Labour leadership election has become even more bizarre today. Len McCluskey, the leader of Unite the Union and a key Corbyn backer, has given a Guardian interview in which he suggest that the ugly behaviour of Corbyn supporters online is actually the work of the security services. He tells Decca Aitkenhead: “Do people believe for one second that the security forces are not involved in dark practices? Decca, I have been around long enough … the type of stuff that we ultimately find out about, under the 30-year rule.” When Aitkenhead challenges him on this, McCluskey continues: “Well, I tell you what, anybody who thinks that that isn’t happening

Today Jeremy Corbyn has launched his campaign ahead of the Labour leadership election. Corbyn, who is being challenged by Owen Smith, used the launch to announce that — under him — the next Labour government would introduce compulsory pay audits for companies with more than 21 staff — in order to show whether or not they are discriminating against female employees. However when asked by Sky News if this meant he would publish an equal pay audit for his own office, Corbyn failed to commit. Perhaps that’s for the best given that any such report is unlikely to make inspiring reading. Forget comparing the salary difference between women and men in the top jobs, when

In order to become a ‘registered supporter’ of the Labour party, you first have to disclose whether you’re a member of an organisation opposed to the Labour party. Such as, I suppose, the Labour party. You also have to affirm that you agree with the party’s ‘aims and values’, which must be the hardest bit, because who alive now knows what those are? If the leader of the Labour party — to pick an example not wholly at random — agrees with the aims of the Labour party, then how come he just voted against the party’s own manifesto in order to oppose Trident? Or is the idea supposed to

Jesus H Christ. Is this what it comes down to? A smarmy post-Tribunite nonentity swathed in unrealistic ambition, versus Chauncey Gardener? It is close to pointless wondering who to support between these political titans, Owen Smith or Jeremy Corbyn. If Smith wins, which I doubt very, very, much, he is no more adept to change the nature of the party than is Corbyn. He has not the nous, balls or means to challenge the activist base and thus recapture those Labour votes which, since 2005, have been winnowing away to Ukip, or the Tories, or to nowhere. Nor even that much support within the PLP. There are two big issues

The Trident debate might be about national security, but all the parties have political points they want to make. Indeed, the reason the debate is happening now is that the Tories wanted something to bring them together, and divide, Labour post-referendum. Angus Robertson, the SNP’s Westminster leader, began with a few kind words for the new Prime Minister. But then, he was straight on to repeatedly—and theatrically—asking the government front bench to set out what the full life time cost of the Trident replacement would be. There is an argument to be had about the cost of Trident—and whether it is the most effective form of defence spending—but Robertson’s argument