the most left wing member of the Labour Party's organisation committee, declared on Monday that the witch-hunting of Peter Tatchell by the party leadership 'is thar start of open the civil He is correct. But it is a civil war which will be fought on a number of issues.
The first concerns constituency Labour Parties. The CLPs comprise the local trade union delegates, the affiliated organisations, the Young Socialists, and the people who canvas at elections, sell raffle tickets and do the hundreds of other tasks which keep the Labour Party alive.
These members do not have a great deal of say in how the Labour Party operates, or what policies will be put into practice when Labour achieves office.
One of the few rights the CLPs do have is to say who will represent them at clections. Or rather they did have. For Michael Foot party leadership have now abolished that right.
By refusing to endorse Peter Tarchell as candidate for Bermondsey, Foot and friends are saying that the vast majority of Labour Party members can no longer decide who will represent them at the polls. That this decision was made in the name of "democracy" is as sick hypocritical.
The second intended victim of Foot's civil war is the Labour Party conference. It was the 1980 conference in Blackpool that gave CLPs the right to select their parliamentary candidates. Before then is was virtually impossible for CLPs to throw out an existing MP.
Even though the sitting MP in Bob Mellish, had no intention of standing again, the leadership's vetoing of Tatchell can be placed in the context of the re-selection controversy. For if Peter Tatchell can thrown out by that leadership, then what chance do parliamentary candidates who replace sitting MPs have of gaining the official seal of approval?
Issue number three in the civil war is the policies decided by the party conference. On such questions as unilateralism, withdrawal from the EEC, against unemployment, Tatchell has much more in common with official Labour policy than has, say, Denis Healey Wing article which has been used by Foot as the reason for the witchhunt, as it is his commitment to fighting the Tories. - such as an afternoon sit-down in the "Westminster area' - were but for Michael Foot they were too radical.
The wants to end the divisions in the party so he can concentrate on fighting Thatcher.
war is the entire future of the Labour Party. By over-riding the decision of the Bermondsey Party and by launching the witch-hunt, the party leadership has shown it be is prepared to wreck and destroy the Labour Party, rather than see that party adopt socialist policies or left wing representatives.
If they are successful, their actions will demoralise or drive out of the party tens of thousands of activists.
Labour's chances not just in this fight election but in future ones as well. Peter prepared to risk that rather than see the Labour Party taken over by the left. They are the agents of In the London Labour BriefTatchell, also made clear The tactics he suggested parucularly blood curdling, So much for Foot's claim that The fourth issue in the civil Foot and his allies know that That in turn will ruin But Foot and company are