Full text:
Over the last 24 hours, a number of false and defamatory statements have been published about me concerning the launch of Your Party’s membership portal.
The portal was properly launched in accordance with the party’s roadmap.
At no point was members’ data misused or put at risk.
All funds received from members were ringfenced and protected in the appropriate manner.
These baseless attacks on my character are politically-motivated and I intend to hold to account those responsible for making them.
To that end, I have this evening instructed specialist defamation lawyers.
To avoid prejudicing or complicating any future legal process, I will not be making any further comment about this matter at this time.
Threatening to sue journalists is a bit too much like a Reform party tactic, isn’t it?
That politicians on the left are quick to announce that they will use the bourgeois courts on each other is pretty dispiriting.
My (irrational) feeling about this is that there’s more going on than just what we’re seeing. And I’m pretty sure some of it involves state intelligence operatives.
Well as most of her claims, do not match the other MPs accusations against her. That court case is just waisting more time.
The Other MPs have been very careful in their wording. Just suggesting that the membership portal was unauthorised. And that the one named individual had no access to accounts.
Any other accusations have come from members confused/angry about the breakdown. And genral public.
According to her own claim 20000 plus people joined the party without knowing she was working alone. She has openly admitted she started the portal independently of other founders etc.
Her accusations that membership control was being diluted by people connected to the other camp. If true. Is important. As all the donations and membership fees were paid based on promises of complete member control.
But ATM both side are just threatening to slow down any resolution with court cases. If either side truly cares about member control. Both need to step back. And accept 20000 plus members now have that duty to build that control.
If Your Party doesn’t exist by the next general election I’ll probably vote for the Greens but they’re a hard sell to the moderates sadly. The Tories have completely lost that moderate vote, their traditional right wing voter base along with a chunk of their MPs have jumped ship to Reform and Labour have lost all respect across the board in the last 12 months sadly. Without a credible left wing alternative like Your Party and with the massive amount of frankly racist rhetoric that’s been kicked up in this country lately I think there’s no hope of avoiding a Reform majority then we’re truly fucked.
Lol, lmao. The speed that’s this has imploded is impressive, even for the left. It’s almost funny enough to make you forget that we’re going to have a Reform government in 4 years. Almost.
Just join the Green party.
The problem with the green party is they don’t have a mature attitude to environmentalism it’s at the level of naive teenager lecturing an electrical engineer.
I literally think that Corbyn would struggle to organise a piss-up in a brewery.
As a phrase it makes me laugh.
Do you honestly think you could convince any brewery. To allow your friends to come and drink all their stock.
The whole idea getting people drunk at a brewery is easy. Completely ignore the very purpose of a brewery existing. It would be no easier then buying a shit load of alchole and shipping it to any other building. Likely a lot harder as the owners have good reason to distrust heavy drinkers around their equipment.
But it Def seems he has issues keeping any group on track. But honestly this mess is very like every other attempt to form a left of centre party. As in factions form and try to take control. No one seems able to lead and not experience these issues.
Most breweries/cidereries I know of round me seem to have regular, have a tour, drink lots events. It’s a no brainer really.
So you are saying. You depend on brewery owners to arrange your piss up for you. To the point they set the date and time. You at best buy some tickets.
How is that in any way you organising anything. When taking a lover to dominos. Do you tell them you organised an Italian meal. Or took them out.
As I indicated. Organising a pissup in any other rentable building would be easier. Where you can set times dates etc. breweries at least small ones. May well offer party plans. Never tried. But still that tends to be them doing the organising to ensure safety etc. And no easier then any other adult party rental location.
So you are saying. You depend on brewery owners to arrange your piss up for you. To the point they set the date and time. You at best buy some tickets.
How is that in any way you organising anything. When taking a lover to dominos. Do you tell them you organised an Italian meal. Or took them out.
That’s why the saying “couldn’t organise a piss-up in a brewery” is an insult. The bar is set insanely low (organise your friends, buy tickets or pay on the door, get drunk) but you still believe that they wouldn’t be capable of it.
Nope.that is how high people who have never worked in a functional brewery think it would be. As alchole is around. Such saying are often flawed. Shooting fish in a barrel. Try it impact shock is more likely to kill the fish. Then your bullet hitting it.
Your idea that breweries invite guests in to drink. Is way way more modern then the saying. It’s a post 2000 micro breweries trend. And Def did not happen in the 1960s when such terms existed.
And as I say. Such an arrangement is no more you organising it then a restaurant is you organising a meal. It’s the restaurant staff doing so.
I always prefer “couldn’t organise a pissup in a pissuppery”.
Grins. Hilariously meaningless. Love it.
So she’s not said if she discussed with anyone the members portal. Looks like she unilaterally did that like when she announced the party early.
Since she had a whiff of leadership, I’ve seen a whole new side of her. Trying to blow up the project for her own ego. Calling your co-leader sexist is highly unprofessional, even when you disagree.
A 150,000 racists only marched on the capital on last Saturday, god forbid we show some urgency.
So she’s not said if she discussed with anyone the members portal
She has, from her previous statement: “Neither of this week’s emails had the dual authorisation of both myself and Jeremy - which was the agreement made at the start of this process.”
Calling your co-leader sexist is highly unprofessional, even when you disagree.
She didn’t say that, she said she was being subject to appalling behaviour and exclusion from the working group that she likened to a “sexist boys’ club”. She never called Corbyn himself a sexist, and you don’t need to be personally sexist to perpetuate sexist systems.
Also, saying a woman should hide how she’s being mistreated for the sake of professionalism is kind of a shitty thing to do.
That’s not what I said. She has as much rights as the other 5 MPs. She pushed herself into a co-leader role and that will only apply until there is a democratic vote.
I’m autistic. When people don’t agree with me. I don’t call it discriminatory. For that, there would have to be a pattern over a period of time longer than 4 weeks. Not getting unilateral say is not sexism. Her mistreatment accusations are real vague and lacking in examples.
There is a difference between an email and a system that is subject to the most sensitive data and subject to laws. You cannot just whim buy it. It affects everyone.
Whether she said it exactly, or insinuated it. She attacked his character.
I didn’t say she should hide sexism, but to attack peoples character within weeks when you don’t get your way sucks. If I was any of them I’d no longer want to work with her. She cannot work as a team. How can you set up a project with her. She hasn’t got the reputation or following JC has. What are her credentials for leader? What contest did she win? She carries more negative impact than benefit and decided to torpedo a promising movement when she didn’t get her way.
Number 1 rule of politics is disagree privately, be united publicly.
I’m autistic. When people don’t agree with me. I don’t call it discriminatory. For that, there would have to be a pattern over a period of time longer than 4 weeks. Not getting unilateral say is not sexism. Her mistreatment accusations are real vague and lacking in examples.
So just because she didn’t leak a bunch of emails and internal communications like a drama YouTuber you can just safely dismiss her claims of mistreatment? You don’t have any idea of how things are going internally within Your Party and internal sources have indicated that Sultana is being pushed out by Corbyn and his orbiters.
Whether she said it exactly, or insinuated it. She attacked his character.
I didn’t say she should hide sexism, but to attack peoples character within weeks when you don’t get your way sucks. If I was any of them I’d no longer want to work with her. She cannot work as a team. How can you set up a project with her.
Funny you say this, from the Novara article I linked:
One insider told Novara Media that Sultana allies Driscoll, Feinstein and Winter have been “told to fuck off”, leading to stalemate, dysfunction and a whole host of people who really should know better refusing to work with others.
Where was this ‘they should suck it up and work together’ attitude when Adnan Hussian was subtweeting Sultana and telling her to ‘sit down’ (a totally not sexist and very professional thing to do)?
She hasn’t got the reputation or following JC has. What are her credentials for leader? What contest did she win? She carries more negative impact than benefit and decided to torpedo a promising movement when she didn’t get her way.
She’s the only person in this political project with any significant political standing other than Corbyn. She’s popular, an effective communicator and she’s the reason Your Party exists at all.
She’s not the reason it exists at all. When she announced it, it came out discussions had been going on for a while and a process was being formed. The independent group of 5 MPs was already working together.
She left the party, jumped in on something and tried to push herself into leadership.
Adnan already talked about being pushed out, and he’s clearly not happy by that. Is it right, that only 2 MPs in a group of 6 have a say and staffers do but no other MP does. You’re very selectively picking points you want and really twisting them.
She is an effective communicator, and politically principled. I was a fan before this, but her kiboshing a new project because she doesn’t have 50% of power is not a good luck.
Oh, and who is this insider? Someone in Sultana’s camp? Who said fuck off? This is vague.
I have no idea what you meant by the YouTuber comment. It’s not something I follow and politics is all about winning over voters. Public spats never work or help.
Pushed out? This group is 6 MPs and some helpers. If 1 member does there own thing, calls the other 6 sexist, you’d bet the others wouldn’t want to work with them. However, the loss is 1 independent MP. Better than 5. I still expect this to go ahead without her. She’ll probably crawl back to Labour in a year or so.
She has openly admitted in her first response. That she acted alone.
She also claimed clear reason why she felt she had to. Based on control being removed from membership before the members had any options to prevent it.
We have no idea if that is true or not.
But she has not denied she acted alone. Only failed to tell members before 20000 (using her own claims) signed up.
And suggesting women should be silent about sexism due to professionalism. Is a very predudiced viewpoint designed to further systemic prejudice. You really should not fall for such ideas.
There is no real membership yet. Paid membership is still in the pipeline. You need a structure. Rules. When you procure a membership system it has to respect privacy and provide the required functionality.
You cannot just grab any system. Is it even safe.
It’s also vague what sexism she is referring to. If there are 6 men and 1 woman and she feels her views should weigh 50% because she is a woman, that’s not sexism, that’s using sexism to further her agenda. In another breath, she complained about power in the hands of JCs allies, such a Karie Murphy. She’s complaining about women (her) not getting a say, but Karie shouldn’t because her being a woman is irrelevant because she’s a JC ally.
It seems you have taken every word she said is in good faith, and none of JCs and the other 5 MPs are. It’s a skewed perspective.
Sultana may have lacked authorization. But 20000+ members were defiantly valid in thinking that is what they signed up to.
Any court would side with them. So refusing to consider them members would be f*&^ing dangerous to the progress of this party.
If the DD hasn’t come out, the membership isn’t active. 20k people have been mislead and scammed to sign up to an unofficial system. Over 600k people signed up, many because of JC, if 20k got duped, it doesn’t mean anything in terms of legality. You haven’t even seen the terms, so you’re speculating in a way that catastrophises this.
It’s pretty clear you dislike JC and anything that could make him look bad is true to you. If it helps you feel better, OK, but it’s irrelevant to the 600k people that are keen for a left party that they can call home.
The membership was paid by card not DD.
And came out. Maybe actually find the facts before expressing an opinion.
