As part of the #MeetTheMovement series, The Canary spoke with the founder of the Harmony Party UK John Urquhart. They explained about the party’s organisational structure:

We operate by direct democracy but we’re both a singular entity and many smaller ones the larger entity is comprised of.

The components are Assemblies, which can be divided into two types. The larger, Committees and Committee Societies, and the smaller, Working Groups or Societies. Members can join or depart and participate as they see fit. We have both the geographically-oriented Assemblies – our Constituency Societies – and then we have an array of what you might call “topic-focused”, non-geographic Assemblies.

Assemblies can overrule their own decisions, and Society Committee or Committee decisions can overrule Working Group/Society decisions. The Party as a whole at conference can overrule any decision.

(Assemblies can also spawn other Assemblies. A good example of this is how our Operational Working Group is likely to become the Operations Society Committee in the near future: it will need to spawn focused Assemblies for IT and other things as it grows and specialism becomes more viable.)

All of the Assemblies (regardless of scale) have the same structure and the same basic processes for making decisions in common, and all Assemblies have an elected organiser, called a Secretary.

The Secretaries are tasked with ensuring everyone is aware of Assembly events in accordance with the will of the Assembly members; chairing Assembly gatherings; and helping Assembly members find consensus by negotiating between disparate viewpoints during discussion & debate of members. They can also delegate, and can create Deputies, though the Deputies are also directly elected and are NOT appointed.

Whenever there is no Secretary or Deputy in an Assembly, the general secretary undertakes most of these responsibilities.

The Secretaries also facilitate communication between Assemblies, and five key Assembly Secretaries are members of the day-to-day working body, the Secretarial Committee – as am I as Party general secretary.

The SC is constrained to act only within the consensus of the Party. If we don’t, we can be recalled.

Decisions themselves happen in up to three phases. An Assembly might come to a decision by simple discussion – and if there is no dissent whatsoever, that’s fine. It’s done: you’ve got consensus!

If there’s disagreement and it isn’t reasonably simply resolved, the chair of the discussion will call for a formal debate.

At the Moot itself – which can be physical or digital (or a combination of those) – there is a structured, formal debate. If a decision emerges, that’s consensus.

If one doesn’t and there are still multiple options on the table and the Secretary feels the debate has become intractable, then we move to a STAR (Score then Automated Runoff) ballot. The Party uses STAR for all internal balloting.

At the moment all of this is digitally organised – via the central hub for organising, the Party Moot.

It’s the heart of the Party for participation. It’s somewhat similar to a live chat forum but we also have Zoom conferencing and other useful features, and the Operational Working Group is working on more in the background.

Members are sent to the Party Moot by their “digital welcome pack” (we’ve not jumped to physical packs just yet).

You’ll notice that we have no designated leaders in any of this: and that’s because everyone, collectively, is in charge. And that’s kind of the point. If Harmony Party members are elected into office, even locally, it’ll mean you could walk into our meetings – physically or in the metaphorical digital sense – and change local policy just by talking and persuading people you’re right.

So is there another political Party out that there that could revolutionise government just by being elected to it?

I believe we’ve got the power to be truly transformational at every level.

Featured image via the Harmony Party UK

The Jeremy Corbyn project, and all it represents, is in turmoil. They say things come in threes, and they have. The project could well be days away from imploding entirely. But it’s not over, yet. Here’s what people need to do. Quickly.

Three setbacks

I tweeted this on Wednesday 27 February:

Whatever your thoughts (& mine) are on the #ChrisWilliamson, #SecondReferendum and #TINGE situations, I think that this is the beginning of the end of the #Corbyn project as we know it – whether or not you think that is a good thing or a bad thing.

Societal chaos continues… pic.twitter.com/u6emltz3Vg

— Steve Topple (@MrTopple) February 27, 2019

Some people weren’t happy. So I thought it best to expand on it.

If the “Corbyn project” (in this context I mean him, his values/vision and his supporters both in and out of parliament) had been hit by one setback, then I don’t think there would have been an issue. Two curve balls, and it might have been a middle sized blip. But three and the damage is looking almost irreparable.

This is why.

The Independent Group

Firstly, let’s deal with The Independent Group (TIG). The fracturing of the Labour Party in this manner was always inevitable. To the ‘moderates’, ‘Blairites’, ‘right-wingers’ or whatever your preferred turn-of-phrase is, a Corbyn-led party was never acceptable. So it was a case of ‘when’, not ‘if’.

Now, we have a small but vocal group of ex-Labour and Tory MPs, supported by much of the press and, in part but quietly, by other Labour and opposition politicians. In isolation, the Corbyn project could have managed this.

The Second Referendum

Secondly, we have the giving in to the ‘FBPE’ and ‘People’s Vote’ campaign. I don’t mean this in terms of holding a so-called ‘Second Referendum’. That has always been Labour’s position. I mean in terms of committing to campaign for Remain during such a vote.

This firstly goes against a previous manifesto commitment from Labour. You can argue that the Brexit process has become so fucked that Labour had no choice but to change course. But for me this doesn’t hold water. Not least because after Tory Election Fraud, a third of the UK electorate not voting at all in general elections and people already feeling politicians don’t represent them, by betraying the EU Referendum result Labour has just helped put the final nail in the coffin of the rotting corpse that is UK democracy.

As I pointed out to George Galloway this week, it also reeks of political tightrope walking. Of the top 25 marginal seats in England and Wales, ones Labour need to target in the next general election, 20 of them voted Leave.

But again, even with the TIG formation, Labour’s decision over a Second Referendum wouldn’t have been a complete disaster. It would have been very problematic, but not a catastrophe.

The Chris Williamson issue

Now, we have the suspension of Chris Williamson. Views are extremely divided on this. For example, the Guardian and Novara ‘middle-class-yet-one-of-us-really’ commentators are taking the line that this is the right thing to do, as his behaviour has been problematic for a while. This has been met with anger by some, who see this as a betrayal by them. Wolves. Sheep. False Prophets. Take your pick of Biblical analogies that people might use in reference to them.

Some believe that Williamson is subject to a witch-hunt for hosting a black, Jewish woman at an event organised by a left wing Jewish group – both of who are not the ‘right kind of Jewish person’. Other’s believe he has been misrepresented, as they say the full video of the Momentum Sheffield event where he made certain comments shows.

I couldn’t possibly comment on any of that.

But Williamson is one of Corbyn’s loyalist and closest allies. So his suspension to many appears to be a capitulation by Corbyn in the face of a growing crisis. Now, again in isolation this could be viewed as a move by Corbyn to further show he is acting on the antisemitism we are led to believe is rife in the Labour Party. I’m not a member so I wouldn’t know. But it would have been a move which may or may not have been a wise one.

Now, put all these three events together, and what have you got?

You have the Corbyn project falling apart at the seams. Again, here’s why.

Blow one

Firstly, TIG has removed some of his most vocal critics from the Labour Party. But it has placed them in a position of a fairly sizeable position of power and influence. Backed by some of the media, and offering a left wing alternative in England and Wales unavailable before, there is a clear and present danger from them in any upcoming election. If they had remained in the party, they would have been manageable. But now, they’re rogue. It’s left Corbyn weakened.

Blow two

Secondly, Labour’s Remain Second Referendum position was blatantly a decision removed from Corbyn’s hands. It was instigated by, once again, a group of ‘middle-class-yet-one-of-us-really’ group of MPs – Emily Thronberry and Keir Starmer to name but two – who have publicly bought into the Corbyn project for their own political gain. We’re back to those Biblical analogies, again. They have done this for their own political gain, also – knowing it would destabilise the project. This power-grab has also left Corbyn weakened.

Blow three

Thirdly, the Williamson decision was also forced upon Corbyn. This time it was by the mainstream media, many of his Shadow Cabinet (again, some out for their own political gain) and some of his inner circle. On Twitter, the likes of Owen Jones have come out saying it was the right decision. Electronic Intifada journalist Asa Winstanley is not convinced by his proclamations:

Pure McCarthyism from a willing tool of the Israel lobby: https://t.co/4KdnSqDHPU https://t.co/Av6lQbJj28

— Asa Winstanley (@AsaWinstanley) February 27, 2019

I couldn’t possibly comment.

But once again, this forcing of Corbyn’s hand has left him weakened.

Knock out?

So, all in all, he has suffered a triple blow of sucker-punches in the space of just over a week. Either he and his inner circle have lost self-confidence in what they are doing, or they believe appeasement, whether right or wrong, is the way forward for the movement.

In my opinion? They have made disastrously wrong-footed moves on all accounts.

Corbyn has been left completely undermined, out-of-control of his own party and politically adrift. He has lost control of all three of these situations, all three of which have now critically damaged the project. To think otherwise is delusional.

So, what can be done?

The reality?

This is based on these caveats. I couldn’t possibly say if I agree with them:

• The TIG is a self-serving bunch of odious shits who need to be exposed as the politically gravy-training bastards they are.
• A Second Referendum with Remain as an option will only serve to further polarise our already fractured society, alienate many working class people already politically homeless and further embolden the right wing.
• Williamson’s suspension is antisemitism being used as a political weapon by some people so vehemently opposed to the Corbyn project that there’s no barrel they won’t scrape the bottom of.

If you agree with these statements, then the solution is a complex, yet also simple one.

Rapid collapse

Enough is enough, now. The world, from Trump to Venezuela, from India/Pakistan to the stock markets, from the EU to Sudan and from climate chaos to the genocide of disabled people, is in meltdown. I firmly believe that the corporatist capitalist system we live under is in its death throes. The ravenous opposition to the Corbyn project from the system and its supporters is evidence of this. Not because Corbyn is some ‘Red under the Bed’ communist threat. He’s a democratic socialist for fuck’s sake. But because the project represents a shifting of power into the hands of ordinary people. And that is fucking dangerous for the system and its gatekeepers.

So, if the system is collapsing, then why are we pussyfooting around so much? Moreover, why is the Corbyn project?

To the supporters

Corbyn supporters who understand all of the above: keep doing what you’re doing. Don’t stop. I may not believe Corbyn is the answer, as I’ve always said, but while people are dying in this country he is the best, most immediate solution.

Corbyn supporters who are buying into the ravenous opposition (I see you on my timeline): think about what you’re doing, why you’re doing it and what’s influencing you. Step back from yourself and look in, because you’re playing into people’s hands without realising it. Also remember just why you became part of the Corbyn project in the first place.

Corbyn supporters who are acting like this isn’t happening: please stop. It’s not helping anyone.

Allegedly Corbyn-supporting journalists and commentators: I’m not wasting my breath on you.

To Jeremy

Corbyn. Yes, you, Jeremy: stop pussyfooting around.

I know it’s not in your nature to aggressively fight tooth and nail against those who seek to destroy you. You’re a pacifist, therefore by default you’re sadly far too kind and considerate. But this is beyond a joke. You surely must see what’s happening, here. Moreover, you must see why it’s happening. Whether I fully buy into your project or not, I know that you have the system and the establishment gatekeepers on the run. So now is not the time for capitulation.

Stop this. Come out and say what you really think, what you really believe and do it with conviction. You have a third of the country politically homeless. Working class communities lured inadvertently to the right. These people need you – but they need you to be robust. Quite frankly, with many politicians and most of the press hostile to you – what have you got to lose? Many more MPs to TIG. No bad thing – if you stand firmer.

What endeared you to people in the first place was your honest, refreshing style of politics. We need that back again. And, if that means breaking away from the Labour Party machinery, of which parts are now actively working against you, then so be it. I imagine if I did a nationwide show of hands who’d vote for a new, Corbyn-led party over Labour, you’d get a majority. Have a word with the Greens while you’re about it as well, please.

Too many people need you right now. Not least my chronically ill, disabled girlfriend, who was in tears today over the political and social madness that has been unfolding around you.

We don’t need you to capitulate. We need you to be you.

Time is running out Jeremy. So, what’s it going to be?

If you like my writing here, any gifts are gratefully accepted. Thank you.

The Last Leg, the flagship Channel 4 comedy show known for its advocacy for disabled people, has just scraped the bottom of a barrel that was already pretty low.

Anna Soubry. On, again.

Anna Soubry was once again a guest on Friday 22 February. I say once again, because her last appearance resulted in uproar on Twitter. This led to host Adam Hills having to acknowledge [from 1:40] on the show that people weren’t happy. He subsequently questioned her on her voting record – to which she gave a non-answer.

Why the uproar? Quite obviously because Soubry was part of the Coalition government cabinet, and subsequent Tory-led one, that pushed through some of the most noxious welfare reforms in living memory. She voted for most if not all of them as well.

“Grave” and “systematic” human rights violations

These reforms were slammed by the UN as causing “grave” and “systematic” violations of disabled people’s human rights, resulting in a “human catastrophe” for them. That was just two of five UN reports into successive governments’ treatment of sick, disabled and poor people since June 2016.

An Oxford University study found that at least 590 people had taken their own lives, due in part to the Department for Work and Pensions’ (DWP) Work Capability Assessment.

Tens of thousands dead

Meanwhile, nearly 30 people a day have been dying on the DWP’s watch, either waiting for benefit decisions or when the department told them they were ready to move towards work. Then, the DWP was forced to reveal 21,000 people died waiting for it to pay them money it owed them.

Sick and disabled people have been persecuted by the Tories, sometimes to the point of death. Hills himself said on The Last Leg that the Tories were effectively carrying out a “genocide” against disabled people.

So all that begs the question: if The Last Leg is such a strong advocate for disabled people’s human rights, why have a guest on who was part of ‘systematically’ violating them?

Increasingly irrelevant

Two reasons.

Since it began, The Last Leg has become increasingly ‘mainstreamed’. It used to be a fairly radical show, especially regarding its view on disabled people’s treatment under the Conservatives. But with ratings come restrictions, and it’s become more and more obvious that the programme is kowtowing to keep its prime time slot.

It’s probably a reflection of the show’s producers, whom one imagines have been salivating at the formation of The Independent Group. Centrist ejaculations all round.

But moreover, and lets be honest, Hills and his co-hosts Josh Widdicombe and Alex Brooker don’t live in the same world millions of disabled people do.

Middle class, utterly detached

Hills and Brooker specifically, having impairments, have probably never had the constant fear of a brown envelope dropping through their letterbox. They’ve probably never had to attend multiple fit-for-work assessments; desperately trying to prove how ill they are just to scrape together a few pennies under Employment and Support Allowance (ESA).

And ultimately, these middle class, obvious liberals (the constant baiting of Jeremy Corbyn is a fairly good indicator) probably don’t give that much of a shit. Because if they did, they’d protest at their producer’s choice of guest in Soubry. The carnage her and her ilk have meted upon disabled people is unparalleled in modern Western society.

They don’t give a shit because their comfortable little lives are sustained by their now mediocre excuse for a comedy show, which will happily promote snakes and charlatans like Soubry – who feign care with one hand while metaphorically punching disabled people with the other.

Shameless carpetbaggers

Hills, Brooker and Widdicombe are disability carpetbaggers, making money off disabled people’s misery.

Brooker managed to ask Soubry a question about her voting record on welfare-related issues on Friday’s show. But as usual she fobbed it off with another shameless display of spin.

“Shameless” best describes The Last Leg. Because its hosts and its team should be ashamed of themselves.

Any donations to keep this site, and my writing here, going are gratefully accepted. Thank you.

UPDATE: as of January 2020 I returned to writing part time at The Canary.

Hi to everyone reading this.

Further to a discussion with the Canary leadership team I have an announcement to make.

From Friday 8 February I am formally not writing on a regular basis for The Canary anymore. I will be continuing to do the podcast weekly and accompanying music features.

The reasons for this are complicated – but actually very simple. My partner Nicola is chronically ill, as many of you know. Before we got together she had previously been told her illnesses were ‘all in her head’ and mental health-related, even to the point that professionals sectioned her under the Mental Health Act when she was desperate for support. She was not living with any mental health issues. When we met she had been given a Fibromyalgia diagnosis (which, in my opinion, doesn’t exist – it’s a parking diagnosis/bullshit illness when there’s actually other things going on).

Since we met, and pushed the medical profession to take her seriously, she’d now living with:

►Hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos/Hypermobility Spectrum Disorder.
►Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME).
►Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome (POTS).
►Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome.
►Non-epileptic tonic clonic seizures.
►Deformities in her left foot and leg.
►Suspected Craniocervical Instability.

There has been a noticeable worsening in her overall health over the past year, and the time for pussy-footing around this has ended.

The long and the short of it is we have taken steps, many through the private health route because the NHS is essentially useless, to begin trying to improve these conditions. Some of these have treatment options if you ignore the politically and corporate-motivated mainstream medical profession. Because essentially under the NHS, Nicola has already exhausted NICE recommended treatments, all having proved ineffective.

She has given up parental responsibility for her son for a period of time, as she is too unwell to give him the support he needs. Plus he has witnessed her ill-health from a young age and it will give him some much needed respite.

But for me, the current situation with my writing for The Canary and Nicola’s health is unsustainable. I cannot write the amount I need/want and give her the support she needs to try and improve her health. One thing had to give – and if push comes to shove it will be work.

So, to that end, I am stopping writing for a period of time.

Nicola needs my full support, and that’s what she is going to get, regardless of my ‘career’ (which many of you know was never a planned move by me, it just fell into my lap by accident, so I’m not precious about it). I have essentially been performing the role of a full time carer for over a year. I have to cook every meal, do the housework, arrange Nicola’s appointments, support her travelling to them, speak on her behalf at them, manage our finances, supervise her with a complex range of tablets – all of this while also writing around 15 articles a week, recording and editing a podcast on my own, recording the Topple Galloway show, caring for a 12-year-old child and supporting my mother who has dementia.

I am confident in both mine and her strength and abilities, but also those of the medical professionals we are now dealing with, that we now have some of the right diagnoses. But I’m also now focused on trying to improve her health if possible.

If this does happen, she can start to live her life properly for the first time. As I think with all impairments and illnesses, she has the right to do whatever she wants with her life without any pressure or anyone telling her what to do. To that end, once her health is improved, I’ll be returning full time to allow her to follow whatever paths she chooses in this world, without the pressure of the system and state telling her she has to find work. She has sacrificed enough, and been appallingly treated over the years, that she deserves to be as free as she wishes from the shackles of this disgusting system we live under.

So, that’s it. If you have story ideas please email editors@thecanary.co but I’ll still be about on social media, so feel free to tag me in things/DM/whatever.

There are a few people who I’d like to thank for the support – but they’ll know who they are. There are others who I’d like to extend a ‘fuck you’ to, as many people and groups have essentially dropped Nicola like a hot potato or betrayed her when she needed them most. As Mariah Carey said in the song Petals:

So many I considered closest to me

Turned on a dime and sold me

Out dutifully

Although that knife was chipping away at me

They turned their eyes away

And went home to sleep…

Please feel free to donate so I can continue to maintain this site.

Sending love and solidarity to those that deserve it.

South Yorkshire Women’s Aid is facing closure, due to a lack of local authority funding. I spoke to Doncaster Cabinet Member for Communities and the Voluntary Sector, Cllr Chris McGuinness, about the centre’s plight. Here’s his response in full.

In April 2016 Doncaster Women’s Aid closed following the loss of its primary funding from Big Lottery. The organisation was not funded by Doncaster Council and the Council did not withdraw funding from the organisation. However, following an approach from the organisation the Council provided wide-ranging advice and support to its trustees, including the offer of potential funding to enable it to remain open whilst seeking new grants and income generation opportunities. Unfortunately the trustees of the organisation decided that it was unable to continue and chose to cease operating.

Following closure of the organisation, a group of people wished to set up a new independent charity to replace the organisation, called South Yorkshire Women’s Aid (Doncaster). Doncaster Council supported the new trustees to achieve this, including providing a one-off start up grant of £30,000 with a view to the organisation applying for new funds and generating operating revenue in order to become financially sustainable. Earlier this month (August 2017), the Council agreed to extend the timescales for spending this grant from June 2017 until December 2017, as the grant had not been fully utilised. It also agreed to vary the funding requirements to allow the organisation greater flexibility to provide services.

The grant funding for South Yorkshire Women’s Aid was provided through the Mayor’s Voluntary and Community Sector Grant scheme, itself a one-off £500,000 fund intended to support local charities, community groups and voluntary organisations, which were able to apply for funding of up to £30,000. As the funding was from one-off resources, the Council made clear the need for organisations to plan their future funding strategy, where required, and ensure the independent sustainability of any associated projects. The fund proved to be very popular and was oversubscribed, with all of the funding now allocated. Throughout the process the Council was clear that it was providing South Yorkshire Women’s Aid with a fixed term grant and that the organisation should not expect further grant funding for these reasons.

On 25th August 2017, the trustees of the new organisation wrote to the Council requesting a further small grant until March 2018 and stated that it viewed the Council as its primary funder to meet the aims and objectives of the charity, indicating that it wished the Council to continue providing funding in future years.

This week, the Council became aware that one of the organisation’s trustees recently resigned and a further trustee had no knowledge of the recent media activity and protest. The Council intends to meet trustees of the organisation in the near future to further understand the organisation’s situation, discuss the current grant and ascertain what measures it has taken to secure additional funding and make itself sustainable according to its operating model.

Since 2010, Doncaster Council has already been forced to cut more than £200m from its annual revenue budget and like other Councils faces further significant funding cuts in the coming years. Notwithstanding this, the Council has prioritised tackling Domestic Violence as a key issue and spends in excess of £1m per year on related services, including:

• An Independent Domestic Violence Advocacy (IDVA) service and coordination of Doncaster’s Multi Agency Risk Assessment Conference
• A Women’s Refuge and dispersed homes with support services
• A Floating support service, helping people in their own homes
• Domestic Violence Helpline

In addition, the government funded Growing Futures project operated by Doncaster Children’s Services Trust focuses on therapeutic support for children and young people, finds new and better ways to keep them safe and help them recover from the impact of Domestic Violence – since the Government funding stream ended, the Council has supported Doncaster Children’s Services Trust to maintain this service. The Council has also funded the delivery of non-criminal justice based perpetrator programmes aimed at men who commit domestic violence in order to reduce the number of repeat incidents. Where delivered by external providers, services are commissioned through an open and transparent process in line with the Council’s legal obligations.

Domestic Violence is wholly unacceptable and can have a devastating impact on victims and their children. The Council will continue to prioritise these services within the resources available to it. However, as with all independent charities, South Yorkshire Women’s Aid must plan to exist without reliance on funding from Doncaster Council, which unfortunately is simply not in a position to provide financial assistance to every VCS organisation facing financial pressures. However, the Council will continue to offer support to these groups in order to help them to secure funding from the wide range of charitable trust funds in existence, and the potential for generating income through charitable activities.