Tom Watson's fresh comments on the Falkirk Labour candidate selection row are not making things easy for Ed Miliband
Six weeks ago, Labour's Tom Watson resigned from the shadow cabinet amid the row about the party's candidate selection in Falkirk. He departed after writing one of the more memorable resignation letters in modern politics, comparing Ed Miliband with Buddha and giving a plug to the performance by Drenge that he had just seen at Glastonbury. The substance of the letter was that things would be better for Mr Miliband if Mr Watson – one of whose aides was at the centre of the Falkirk row – were to stand down so that Labour could move on. But Mr Watson finished on an upbeat note of loyalism. "I will be with you all the way, cheering you on from the backbenches," he told Mr Miliband. "You're my friend and leader, and I'm going to do all I can to make sure you win in 2015."
Mr Miliband could be forgiven if he felt that Mr Watson has not quite lived up to that promise in the interview he gave to the Guardian on Friday. In considerable detail, Labour's former general election co-ordinator does not so much move on from the Falkirk row as plunge right back into it. Allegations that the Unite union recruited Labour members without their knowledge were false, he says. Nor were they made by people recruited through the trade union membership scheme. Two pieces of evidence purporting to support the allegations were inaccurate, unreliable and later withdrawn. The whole thing, says Mr Watson, was a storm in a teacup which had been exploited to reopen the issue of Labour's union links and had caused "a huge injustice" to his former aide.
These claims are potentially very difficult for Mr Miliband. If Mr Watson is right, the very least that could be said is that Mr Miliband has not managed the affair well or fairly. But is that the case? The truth about that can only be established if Labour now publishes its internal report on Falkirk in full – as the Guardian first proposed in June and as Mr Watson also urged in his resignation letter.
But there is more at stake here than whether Mr Miliband handled the Falkirk affair well or badly. The week after Mr Watson resigned, Mr Miliband upped the stakes by insisting that trade unionists must now opt in to become individual members of the Labour party rather than opt out of the current union affiliation scheme. That plan, which is still being drafted, has big implications for the character, politics and finances of the Labour party. It triggers an argument within the party which, in wider public terms, Mr Miliband cannot be seen to lose. The Labour leader has called a special conference next spring to debate his reforms. But Mr Watson, who does not want to change the union link, and who is no political innocent, has surely made his leader's task that bit harder. Reported by guardian.co.uk 2 days ago.
Six weeks ago, Labour's Tom Watson resigned from the shadow cabinet amid the row about the party's candidate selection in Falkirk. He departed after writing one of the more memorable resignation letters in modern politics, comparing Ed Miliband with Buddha and giving a plug to the performance by Drenge that he had just seen at Glastonbury. The substance of the letter was that things would be better for Mr Miliband if Mr Watson – one of whose aides was at the centre of the Falkirk row – were to stand down so that Labour could move on. But Mr Watson finished on an upbeat note of loyalism. "I will be with you all the way, cheering you on from the backbenches," he told Mr Miliband. "You're my friend and leader, and I'm going to do all I can to make sure you win in 2015."
Mr Miliband could be forgiven if he felt that Mr Watson has not quite lived up to that promise in the interview he gave to the Guardian on Friday. In considerable detail, Labour's former general election co-ordinator does not so much move on from the Falkirk row as plunge right back into it. Allegations that the Unite union recruited Labour members without their knowledge were false, he says. Nor were they made by people recruited through the trade union membership scheme. Two pieces of evidence purporting to support the allegations were inaccurate, unreliable and later withdrawn. The whole thing, says Mr Watson, was a storm in a teacup which had been exploited to reopen the issue of Labour's union links and had caused "a huge injustice" to his former aide.
These claims are potentially very difficult for Mr Miliband. If Mr Watson is right, the very least that could be said is that Mr Miliband has not managed the affair well or fairly. But is that the case? The truth about that can only be established if Labour now publishes its internal report on Falkirk in full – as the Guardian first proposed in June and as Mr Watson also urged in his resignation letter.
But there is more at stake here than whether Mr Miliband handled the Falkirk affair well or badly. The week after Mr Watson resigned, Mr Miliband upped the stakes by insisting that trade unionists must now opt in to become individual members of the Labour party rather than opt out of the current union affiliation scheme. That plan, which is still being drafted, has big implications for the character, politics and finances of the Labour party. It triggers an argument within the party which, in wider public terms, Mr Miliband cannot be seen to lose. The Labour leader has called a special conference next spring to debate his reforms. But Mr Watson, who does not want to change the union link, and who is no political innocent, has surely made his leader's task that bit harder. Reported by guardian.co.uk 2 days ago.