Alastair Campbell expelled from Labour Party

[CreamofSumYungGai]

Which party did Corbyn vote for then?

[VeganO]

Think you need to address the central issue which is whether this expulsion is appropriate in the circumstances & the fact this is damaging to my Party in my view.
The important point is that Corbyn cites Party discipline as an important principle when it suits him.

[CreamofSumYungGai]

Is it appropriate? Of course it is. See above - “A member of the Party who joins and/ or supports a political organisation other than an official Labour group or other unit of the Party, or supports any candidate who stands against an official Labour candidate, or publicly declares their intent to stand against a Labour candidate, shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a Party member, subject to the provisions of Chapter 6.I.2 below of the disciplinary rules.”

[F*ck The Poor & Fat]

Think you need to address the central issue which is whether this expulsion is appropriate in the circumstances & the fact this is damaging to my Party in my view.
The important point is that Corbyn cites Party discipline as an important principle when it suits him.

Corbyn citing Party discipline always makes me smile. He quite frequently didn’t follow the party line and his actions were brought to the attention of Blair, who knows why, who cares why, but they were. He was given a degree of latitude to follow his conscience on some issues without being suspended.

When it suits him. Without doubt that is true.

[Sid Bishop]

Is it appropriate? Of course it is. See above - “A member of the Party who joins and/ or supports a political organisation other than an official Labour group or other unit of the Party, or supports any candidate who stands against an official Labour candidate, or publicly declares their intent to stand against a Labour candidate, shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a Party member, subject to the provisions of Chapter 6.I.2 below of the disciplinary rules.”

I think that Campbell knew exactly what he was doing when he made it Public that he voted Lib Dem in the EU election. I think he was making a statement that the current leadership does not reflect his own personal political views, so he took this action knowing full well that it would lead to being either suspended or expelled and also ignite big arguments within the Labour Party, on that score..JOB DONE !! No doubt that if in the future the Labour party moves back more towards the centre ground, he will then ( if allowed to ? ) apply to become a member again.

[spen666]

Is it appropriate? Of course it is. See above - “A member of the Party who joins and/ or supports a political organisation other than an official Labour group or other unit of the Party, or supports any candidate who stands against an official Labour candidate, or publicly declares their intent to stand against a Labour candidate, shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a Party member, subject to the provisions of Chapter 6.I.2 below of the disciplinary rules.”

That rule raises an interesting question.

It clearly provides that a "dissenter" ( pardon the shorthand) "shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a Party member,"

It appears that if you support a candidate who stands against a Labour candidate you are automatically ineligible to remain a party member.

So, didn't JC and others on the current NEC support Ken Livingstone when he stood for London Mayor against Frank Dobson? If so, he and they were automatically ineligible to be a member of the Labour Party.

Have they ever applied to be allowed to rejoin the Labour Party? If not, then surely by the wording of this rule, they are not actually members of the Labour Party and therefore not entitled to be leader of the party or a member of the NEC

Now, there is an interesting one for the courts to decide if say Mr Campbell or Mr Blair or someone of that ilk wished to challenge JC etc

[Max B Gold]

Is it appropriate? Of course it is. See above - “A member of the Party who joins and/ or supports a political organisation other than an official Labour group or other unit of the Party, or supports any candidate who stands against an official Labour candidate, or publicly declares their intent to stand against a Labour candidate, shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a Party member, subject to the provisions of Chapter 6.I.2 below of the disciplinary rules.”

That rule raises an interesting question.

It clearly provides that a "dissenter" ( pardon the shorthand) "shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a Party member,"

It appears that if you support a candidate who stands against a Labour candidate you are automatically ineligible to remain a party member.

So, didn't JC and others on the current NEC support Ken Livingstone when he stood for London Mayor against Frank Dobson? If so, he and they were automatically ineligible to be a member of the Labour Party.

Have they ever applied to be allowed to rejoin the Labour Party? If not, then surely by the wording of this rule, they are not actually members of the Labour Party and therefore not entitled to be leader of the party or a member of the NEC

Now, there is an interesting one for the courts to decide if say Mr Campbell or Mr Blair or someone of that ilk wished to challenge JC etc

Isn't their a legal difference between being ineligible to be a party member and actually being expelled?

[CreamofSumYungGai]

Is it appropriate? Of course it is. See above - “A member of the Party who joins and/ or supports a political organisation other than an official Labour group or other unit of the Party, or supports any candidate who stands against an official Labour candidate, or publicly declares their intent to stand against a Labour candidate, shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a Party member, subject to the provisions of Chapter 6.I.2 below of the disciplinary rules.”

That rule raises an interesting question.

It clearly provides that a "dissenter" ( pardon the shorthand) "shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a Party member,"

It appears that if you support a candidate who stands against a Labour candidate you are automatically ineligible to remain a party member.

So, didn't JC and others on the current NEC support Ken Livingstone when he stood for London Mayor against Frank Dobson? If so, he and they were automatically ineligible to be a member of the Labour Party.

Have they ever applied to be allowed to rejoin the Labour Party? If not, then surely by the wording of this rule, they are not actually members of the Labour Party and therefore not entitled to be leader of the party or a member of the NEC

Now, there is an interesting one for the courts to decide if say Mr Campbell or Mr Blair or someone of that ilk wished to challenge JC etc

I'm not sure you understand the word 'interesting'.

But if what you're saying is correct then yes,action could/should have been taken at the time. And JC and others wouldn't have had a leg to stand on.

[spen666]

Is it appropriate? Of course it is. See above - “A member of the Party who joins and/ or supports a political organisation other than an official Labour group or other unit of the Party, or supports any candidate who stands against an official Labour candidate, or publicly declares their intent to stand against a Labour candidate, shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a Party member, subject to the provisions of Chapter 6.I.2 below of the disciplinary rules.”

That rule raises an interesting question.

It clearly provides that a "dissenter" ( pardon the shorthand) "shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a Party member,"

It appears that if you support a candidate who stands against a Labour candidate you are automatically ineligible to remain a party member.

So, didn't JC and others on the current NEC support Ken Livingstone when he stood for London Mayor against Frank Dobson? If so, he and they were automatically ineligible to be a member of the Labour Party.

Have they ever applied to be allowed to rejoin the Labour Party? If not, then surely by the wording of this rule, they are not actually members of the Labour Party and therefore not entitled to be leader of the party or a member of the NEC

Now, there is an interesting one for the courts to decide if say Mr Campbell or Mr Blair or someone of that ilk wished to challenge JC etc

Isn't their a legal difference between being ineligible to be a party member and actually being expelled?

It states automatically ineligible to be or to remain a member...


Is there a legal difference? I would have said there was a difference if the word automatically was not there in the clause. Its one for the courts to decide on. Its a matter of legal interpretation. I could make arguments to support either interpretation.

If you are correct, then the expulsion of Campbell would potentially appear to be unlawful as he was not given the opportunity to put his case . That appears contrary to the rules of natural justice

[CreamofSumYungGai]

Is it appropriate? Of course it is. See above - “A member of the Party who joins and/ or supports a political organisation other than an official Labour group or other unit of the Party, or supports any candidate who stands against an official Labour candidate, or publicly declares their intent to stand against a Labour candidate, shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a Party member, subject to the provisions of Chapter 6.I.2 below of the disciplinary rules.”

I think that Campbell knew exactly what he was doing when he made it Public that he voted Lib Dem in the EU election. I think he was making a statement that the current leadership does not reflect his own personal political views, so he took this action knowing full well that it would lead to being either suspended or expelled and also ignite big arguments within the Labour Party, on that score..JOB DONE !! No doubt that if in the future the Labour party moves back more towards the centre ground, he will then ( if allowed to ? ) apply to become a member again.

Exactly.

If rent-a-gob had voted against Labour in the european elections and kept his big gob shut about it, no one would have been any the wiser and we wouldn't be having this ridiculous discussion. It's almost as if this is what he wanted to happen. Especially now some people seem to have forgotten what a c**t he was as he's now done a tv show about being depressed.

[spen666]

Is it appropriate? Of course it is. See above - “A member of the Party who joins and/ or supports a political organisation other than an official Labour group or other unit of the Party, or supports any candidate who stands against an official Labour candidate, or publicly declares their intent to stand against a Labour candidate, shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a Party member, subject to the provisions of Chapter 6.I.2 below of the disciplinary rules.”

That rule raises an interesting question.

It clearly provides that a "dissenter" ( pardon the shorthand) "shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a Party member,"

It appears that if you support a candidate who stands against a Labour candidate you are automatically ineligible to remain a party member.

So, didn't JC and others on the current NEC support Ken Livingstone when he stood for London Mayor against Frank Dobson? If so, he and they were automatically ineligible to be a member of the Labour Party.

Have they ever applied to be allowed to rejoin the Labour Party? If not, then surely by the wording of this rule, they are not actually members of the Labour Party and therefore not entitled to be leader of the party or a member of the NEC

Now, there is an interesting one for the courts to decide if say Mr Campbell or Mr Blair or someone of that ilk wished to challenge JC etc

I'm not sure you understand the word 'interesting'.

But if what you're saying is correct then yes,action could/should have been taken at the time. And JC and others wouldn't have had a leg to stand on.

If what I suggested was correct, the JC and others automatically became and remain ineligible to be or remain members of the Labour Party. Even now, JC and others would still be ineligible to be or remain members of the Labour Party

[CreamofSumYungGai]

That rule raises an interesting question.

It clearly provides that a "dissenter" ( pardon the shorthand) "shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a Party member,"

It appears that if you support a candidate who stands against a Labour candidate you are automatically ineligible to remain a party member.

So, didn't JC and others on the current NEC support Ken Livingstone when he stood for London Mayor against Frank Dobson? If so, he and they were automatically ineligible to be a member of the Labour Party.

Have they ever applied to be allowed to rejoin the Labour Party? If not, then surely by the wording of this rule, they are not actually members of the Labour Party and therefore not entitled to be leader of the party or a member of the NEC

Now, there is an interesting one for the courts to decide if say Mr Campbell or Mr Blair or someone of that ilk wished to challenge JC etc

Isn't their a legal difference between being ineligible to be a party member and actually being expelled?

It states automatically ineligible to be or to remain a member...


Is there a legal difference? I would have said there was a difference if the word automatically was not there in the clause. Its one for the courts to decide on. Its a matter of legal interpretation. I could make arguments to support either interpretation.

If you are correct, then the expulsion of Campbell would potentially appear to be unlawful as he was not given the opportunity to put his case . That appears contrary to the rules of natural justice

Interesting.

Maybe Mischon de Reya will take Ali on a pro bono basis to help him clear his name?

[CreamofSumYungGai]

That rule raises an interesting question.

It clearly provides that a "dissenter" ( pardon the shorthand) "shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a Party member,"

It appears that if you support a candidate who stands against a Labour candidate you are automatically ineligible to remain a party member.

So, didn't JC and others on the current NEC support Ken Livingstone when he stood for London Mayor against Frank Dobson? If so, he and they were automatically ineligible to be a member of the Labour Party.

Have they ever applied to be allowed to rejoin the Labour Party? If not, then surely by the wording of this rule, they are not actually members of the Labour Party and therefore not entitled to be leader of the party or a member of the NEC

Now, there is an interesting one for the courts to decide if say Mr Campbell or Mr Blair or someone of that ilk wished to challenge JC etc

I'm not sure you understand the word 'interesting'.

But if what you're saying is correct then yes,action could/should have been taken at the time. And JC and others wouldn't have had a leg to stand on.

If what I suggested was correct, the JC and others automatically became and remain ineligible to be or remain members of the Labour Party. Even now, JC and others would still be ineligible to be or remain members of the Labour Party

Law is so interesting.

[spen666]

CoSYG you quoted the rule. Do you have a link to the rules or can you also quote Chapter 6.1.2 of the rules as that is referenced in the paragraph you quoted and may answer the point I raised

[CreamofSumYungGai]

Hang on mate, just getting the book off the shelf.

[Sid Bishop]

Is it appropriate? Of course it is. See above - “A member of the Party who joins and/ or supports a political organisation other than an official Labour group or other unit of the Party, or supports any candidate who stands against an official Labour candidate, or publicly declares their intent to stand against a Labour candidate, shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a Party member, subject to the provisions of Chapter 6.I.2 below of the disciplinary rules.”

I think that Campbell knew exactly what he was doing when he made it Public that he voted Lib Dem in the EU election. I think he was making a statement that the current leadership does not reflect his own personal political views, so he took this action knowing full well that it would lead to being either suspended or expelled and also ignite big arguments within the Labour Party, on that score..JOB DONE !! No doubt that if in the future the Labour party moves back more towards the centre ground, he will then ( if allowed to ? ) apply to become a member again.

Exactly.

If rent-a-gob had voted against Labour in the european elections and kept his big gob shut about it, no one would have been any the wiser and we wouldn't be having this ridiculous discussion. It's almost as if this is what he wanted to happen. Especially now some people seem to have forgotten what a c**t he was as he's now done a tv show about being depressed.

Perhaps Campbell will now go on the usual gravy train of TV shows including ''Get me out of the Jungle'' !!

[Max B Gold]

That rule raises an interesting question.

It clearly provides that a "dissenter" ( pardon the shorthand) "shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a Party member,"

It appears that if you support a candidate who stands against a Labour candidate you are automatically ineligible to remain a party member.

So, didn't JC and others on the current NEC support Ken Livingstone when he stood for London Mayor against Frank Dobson? If so, he and they were automatically ineligible to be a member of the Labour Party.

Have they ever applied to be allowed to rejoin the Labour Party? If not, then surely by the wording of this rule, they are not actually members of the Labour Party and therefore not entitled to be leader of the party or a member of the NEC

Now, there is an interesting one for the courts to decide if say Mr Campbell or Mr Blair or someone of that ilk wished to challenge JC etc

I'm not sure you understand the word 'interesting'.

But if what you're saying is correct then yes,action could/should have been taken at the time. And JC and others wouldn't have had a leg to stand on.

If what I suggested was correct, the JC and others automatically became and remain ineligible to be or remain members of the Labour Party. Even now, JC and others would still be ineligible to be or remain members of the Labour Party

Being ineligible is one thing being expelled infers action by the appropriate person(s) as designated in the Rules. Whether JC was and is ineligible is a moot point because no complaint was made and no evidence presented. Whereas Big Gob Campbell confessed on air!

[spen666]

I'm not sure you understand the word 'interesting'.

But if what you're saying is correct then yes,action could/should have been taken at the time. And JC and others wouldn't have had a leg to stand on.

If what I suggested was correct, the JC and others automatically became and remain ineligible to be or remain members of the Labour Party. Even now, JC and others would still be ineligible to be or remain members of the Labour Party

Being ineligible is one thing being expelled infers action by the appropriate person(s) as designated in the Rules. Whether JC was and is ineligible is a moot point because no complaint was made and no evidence presented. Whereas Big Gob Campbell confessed on air!

The use of the word automatically in the rule implies there is no need for a complaint as JC etc became automatically ineligible to be or remain a member of the party. There is no need for someone to make a complaint if the consequence is automatic

Its a point that courts would need to decide upon, but as I say if you are correct, then the expulsion of Campbell was probably contrary to rules of natural justice as he wasn't given opportunity to put his case before any decision was made

[CreamofSumYungGai]

Does every tom willy or harry that breaches Labour membership rules gets a hearing?

[spen666]

Does every tom willy or harry that breaches Labour membership rules gets a hearing?

They are entitled to one

[F*ck The Poor & Fat]

Is it appropriate? Of course it is. See above - “A member of the Party who joins and/ or supports a political organisation other than an official Labour group or other unit of the Party, or supports any candidate who stands against an official Labour candidate, or publicly declares their intent to stand against a Labour candidate, shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a Party member, subject to the provisions of Chapter 6.I.2 below of the disciplinary rules.”

I think that Campbell knew exactly what he was doing when he made it Public that he voted Lib Dem in the EU election. I think he was making a statement that the current leadership does not reflect his own personal political views, so he took this action knowing full well that it would lead to being either suspended or expelled and also ignite big arguments within the Labour Party, on that score..JOB DONE !! No doubt that if in the future the Labour party moves back more towards the centre ground, he will then ( if allowed to ? ) apply to become a member again.

Exactly.

If rent-a-gob had voted against Labour in the european elections and kept his big gob shut about it, no one would have been any the wiser and we wouldn't be having this ridiculous discussion. It's almost as if this is what he wanted to happen. Especially now some people seem to have forgotten what a c**t he was as he's now done a tv show about being depressed.

Suffering from depression and talking about it on a TV show is something to be applauded. The more this subject gets an airing the more the condition will be understood and tolerated.

I dislike with a passion the current trend with some Labour activists to spew out the bile and hatred when someone dares to have a different view. I always believed the Labour Party to be fairly tolerant but now, God help anybody who veers from the hard left party line, because should you do that expect a torrent of abuse. Not healthy.

[Disoriented]

Is it appropriate? Of course it is. See above - “A member of the Party who joins and/ or supports a political organisation other than an official Labour group or other unit of the Party, or supports any candidate who stands against an official Labour candidate, or publicly declares their intent to stand against a Labour candidate, shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a Party member, subject to the provisions of Chapter 6.I.2 below of the disciplinary rules.”

That rule raises an interesting question.

It clearly provides that a "dissenter" ( pardon the shorthand) "shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a Party member,"

It appears that if you support a candidate who stands against a Labour candidate you are automatically ineligible to remain a party member.

So, didn't JC and others on the current NEC support Ken Livingstone when he stood for London Mayor against Frank Dobson? If so, he and they were automatically ineligible to be a member of the Labour Party.

Have they ever applied to be allowed to rejoin the Labour Party? If not, then surely by the wording of this rule, they are not actually members of the Labour Party and therefore not entitled to be leader of the party or a member of the NEC

Now, there is an interesting one for the courts to decide if say Mr Campbell or Mr Blair or someone of that ilk wished to challenge JC etc

This is all too much logical information for the Marxists. Corbyn is the biggest hypocrite going if he considers Campbell’s actions disloyal given his own track record.

[CreamofSumYungGai]

How can voting for another party be anything other than disloyal?

[Disoriented]

In the same way as Corbyn voting hundreds of times against his own party is.

[Max B Gold]

In the same way as Corbyn voting hundreds of times against his own party is.

He didn't vote against his party. Most of the time he voted against legislation being put forward by the govt of the day. There is difference.