The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


Information request #3

Posted on February 09, 2013 by

For those who haven’t already seen it on Twitter, we’ve been trying to follow up a recent comment made by James Kelly of the splendid Scot Goes Pop! blog, and we’ve drawn a blank. So: does anyone know when the UK Labour Party gave up its full membership of the Socialist International?

The party’s website still claims to be a member, and the Wikipedia entry concurs, so the change of status is likely quite recent*. But the SI’s own site is clear that the party is no longer a participating member, merely an observer. Yet we’ve turned Google upside down searching for any sort of news story about it anywhere.

(And since UK Labour has been an active member for the entire period of the international group’s existence – joining it when it took its present form in 1951 – you’d think someone somewhere would have seen fit to mention an event as significant as it leaving “the worldwide organisation of social democratic, socialist and labour parties”.)

Anyone?

.

*[EDIT @ 13.12: An alert reader uncovers an entry on archive.org still listing the party as a full member as recently as December 27th of last year.)

27 to “Information request #3”

  1. Peter says:

    I just looked at the Socialist International web site and the Labour Party are listed on their world map of member organisations.

    Reply
  2. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    That link just leads you back to the membership page that says they’re an “observer”, though. They’re presumably still technically classed as a “member” while in possession of that status, but they’re no longer a full one.

    It’s like being an “observer member” of a snooker club – you can come in, watch other people playing and perhaps buy a drink at the bar, but you can’t play snooker.

    Reply
  3. Adrian B says:

    Organisations would tend to show when membership grows. They are not as quick to show when a member leaves or downgrades its membership.
    This is a PDF link that I found on the website for a meeting last year. It shows that noone from the UK attended. There is a e-mail link, perhaps the best way to clarify the situation would be to ask the relevant question directly.
    link to socialistinternational.org

    Reply
  4. Doug Daniel says:

    It’s also like being an observer member of the European Parliament, a status given to such countries as Canada, Mexico and the USA – none of which could be called “European” in any way. 
     
    Just like Labour couldn’t be called socialist in any way…

    Reply
  5. Gavin WIlliamson says:

    or has someone been a tad slow in paying any annual membership Fees? still embarrassing though.

    Reply
  6. cheryl says:

    There’s one little comment right at the end of this blog from last month:
    link to labourblogs.com
    The NEC agreed to downgrade Labour’s membership of the Socialist International to observer status, in view of ethical concerns, and to develop international co-operation through new networks.

    Reply
  7. Tearlach says:

    “ in view of ethical concerns”
    What – like they are Socialist?
    So lets dissect the “kids in Bolton are just as important as kids in Bathgate” line, fine, that still stands, but obviously  kids in Bogota or Bologna, are not as important as kids in Bristol or Bath……

    Reply
  8. ianbrotherhood says:

    I was a wine waiter in a big Glasgow Hotel when New Labour held one of their final ‘fundraisers’ before coming to power in 97. Blair was there, followed by all the sooks and wannabees – they must’ve paid a fortune, especially if they were at the top table. (Bet they didn’t realise that the ‘top table’ ran the full length of the biggest hall in the place, must’ve been seventy feet long.)
    The bookies had stopped taking money on them winning. At that time they’d promised to introduce new legislation granting p/t workers certain ‘rights’ if they’d been working for more than x-number of weeks – some holiday time, maternity-related security etc etc. That hotel chain, like so many other service-industries, had already ‘sorted’ an elegant solution to the problem – we were all sacked en masse before the 16-weeks or whatever was reached, and then required to reappear for ‘induction’ etc (again, en masse) if we wanted back in.
    That’s ‘socialism’ New Labour style.
    Simples!!

    Reply
  9. Tattie-boggle says:

    O/T But has anyone seen this shite
    link to bbc.co.uk

    Reply
    • Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “a no-brainer in terms of an event that is going to reach part of the community that perhaps might not get terribly entrenched into this”

      Jesus, he actually said “entrenched”.

      Reply
  10. James K says:

    Adrian B
    Your link shows that Isobel Owen of the Labour party of Great Britain attended.

    Reply
  11. John H says:

    Tattie-boggle
    I see that the BBC’s back to using the word celebrations for the war anniversary next year. Hopefully, people will see through that.

    Reply
  12. creag an tuirc says:

    OT: watching the 6 Nations rugby and thinking to myself what happens to this competition if Milibands’ ‘One Nation’ is implemeted. Do they change it to 3 Nations?

    Reply
  13. ianbrotherhood says:

    @Tattie-boggle –
    That is just sickening beyond belief. No-one could or would dare make it up.

    Reply
  14. Juteman says:

    ”
    World War I took place from 1914 to 1918 and claimed the lives of millions of young men – 947,000 of them from the British Empire.”

    Celebrate.

    Reply
  15. The death throes of an empire celebrating millions of wasted lives lets hope the public reject this stupidity.

    Reply
  16. The Man in the Jar says:

    Re Jutemans comment. I believe that as a per capita Scotland had more war dead in WW1 than any other country apart from Croatia!

    Reply
  17. Alan MacD says:

    Yup, The government wants to play football  in what is essentially a massive  graveyard to celebrate the unofficial ceasefire ….Great idea that…..No really, totally acceptable.
    Im fucking livid!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
     
     
     

    Reply
  18. The Man in the Jar says:

    Please sign and pass on!
    Petition against WW1 “celebrations”
    link to epetitions.direct.gov.uk
     
     

    Reply
  19. Morag says:

    I already signed ages ago, and they still only have about 600 signatures.  Not good.

    Reply
  20. Breastplate says:

    I don’t see any mileage in not approving of a ceasefire. Celebrating The Great War though, is an entirely different matter.

    Reply
  21. Anonymous X says:

    Oddly, the SI seem to have also downgraded the Norwegian Labour party (DNA) and Dutch Labour party (PvdA).
    DNA is to the left of UK Labour, basically a typical social-democratic party by European standards, and governs with the Socialist Left party (self explanatory) and Centre party (liberals and agrarians). Can’t see where they might have major ethical problems, short of finding a Norwegian translator. Norway hasn’t bombed anyone lately, IIRC.
    PvdA is also to the left of Labour, but more liberal than the usual social democratic movement in Europe. It currently governs the Netherlands with the right-liberal VVD party (actually the LibDems’ sister party, but practically identical to the UK Tories). Then again, PvdA has never governed without forming alliances with centre-right parties in all its history, so I can’t see why SI might object to that now.

    Reply
  22. Anonymous X says:

    @ Adrian B, that list does have an attendee from the UK listed, under Gran Bretaña Partido Laburista.
    Still, odd how the Socialist International are happy to have authoritarian movements like Palestine’s FATAH and Mexico’s Institutional Revolutionary Party as full members, but not Labour…

    Reply
  23. Anonymous X says:

    Seems like the German SPD pulled loads of money out of the Socialist International, and is attempting to found a new replacement International called the ‘Progressive Alliance’ in Rome this May.
    link to neues-deutschland.de

    Reply
  24. Anonymous X says:

    Leipzig not Rome, sorry guys.

    Reply
  25. Adrian B says:

    James K
    Anonymous X 
    I read that bloody thing three times before I posted the comment and still I missed it!
    Thanx

    Reply
  26. Anonymous X says:

    Labour have amended their page about SI to mention the party’s current Observer status.
    link to labour.org.uk

    Reply


Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.


  • About

    Wings Over Scotland is a thing that exists.

    Stats: 6,990 Posts, 1,252,848 Comments

  • Recent Posts

  • Archives

  • Categories

  • Tags

  • Recent Comments

    • Geri on Faces In Sand: “Nonzi – I like it! The Nonzis are off to Saudi to get their arse kicked. Imagine having the front…” Oct 21, 00:06
    • Hatey McHateface on Faces In Sand: ““Nonces & Nazis everywhere” Of course, Geri. Look out behind you! Crivens, Geri, that ane might be a Nazi AND…” Oct 20, 22:52
    • Geri on Faces In Sand: “The West is dripping with nonces. Why else would they give them immunity from prosecution & give them a wee…” Oct 20, 22:01
    • Hatey McHateface on Faces In Sand: “How do you know what size mine is? Or how effective a weapon it is? “Why else would blighty &…” Oct 20, 21:00
    • Hatey McHateface on Faces In Sand: ““eating & shagging weans in their spare time” That’s what Indy’s been missing since the female hating medievalists cut of…” Oct 20, 20:53
    • Hatey McHateface on Faces In Sand: “@Lorncal In “No Country For Old Men” the author writes that back in the fifties of the last century, the…” Oct 20, 20:49
    • Geri on Faces In Sand: “They’re well & truly kicking yer arse eh? That’s what you call gubbed. It’s delicious that it’s on all three…” Oct 20, 20:36
    • GM on Faces In Sand: “I second that.” Oct 20, 20:33
    • Geri on Faces In Sand: “Those shite stirring bastards are in every single country, fae the Balkans tae the Middle East, noising up the locals,…” Oct 20, 20:21
    • Lorncal on Faces In Sand: “Northcode: you are right up to a point. We would have had Darien had it been successful and we would…” Oct 20, 20:05
    • Lorncal on Faces In Sand: “H McH: yes, I agree that the circumstances were a bit different in the past, but even in the relatively…” Oct 20, 19:53
    • Northcode on Faces In Sand: “Sam, none of my comments referred to slavery — my point was about co-opted elites, imperial agency, and national sovereignty.” Oct 20, 19:28
    • MaryB on Faces In Sand: “Watching the Covid enquiry report on C4 news. I’m reminded that Nicola behaved similarly to England and the care homes…” Oct 20, 19:13
    • Hatey McHateface on Faces In Sand: ““Neither would it have been abolished” Let me just fix that for you, sam: “Neither would it have been made…” Oct 20, 18:44
    • Hatey McHateface on Faces In Sand: “Well known that the LNM supports the SNP. Her pic is all over some of the merchandise. So yes, as…” Oct 20, 18:31
    • sam on Faces In Sand: “The Scottish people, outside the elite, participated in slavery as sailors,dockworkers and plantation overseers. Doctors worked on plantations. Many in…” Oct 20, 18:14
    • Aidan on Faces In Sand: ““Rev, David Henry suggests at 3.28 hours in the Sunday 18th October youtube of the SSRG conference that MI5 blocked…” Oct 20, 18:03
    • Hatey McHateface on Faces In Sand: “Woohoo, Geri’s back! I guess this means the Ir@nian medievalists have restored some internet connectivity to the citizens of that…” Oct 20, 17:41
    • Hatey McHateface on Faces In Sand: ““private or chartered projects that lacked the institutional, diplomatic and military structures that define colonial sovereignty” I’m sure that fine…” Oct 20, 17:38
    • sarah on Faces In Sand: “Rev, David Henry suggests at 3.28 hours in the Sunday 18th October youtube of the SSRG conference that MI5 blocked…” Oct 20, 16:34
    • Geri on Faces In Sand: “It’s not such a bad idea to self delete themselves fae social media until the adults are back in room.…” Oct 20, 15:31
    • Captain Caveman on Faces In Sand: “”… modernism/neoMarxism/oppressor-oppressed nonsense that, if they had one critical braincell, they would question and refute. However, so powerful a hold…” Oct 20, 15:26
    • Northcode on Faces In Sand: “Sam, yes — the Knight case is an important moment in Scots legal history. It’s just not related to the…” Oct 20, 15:23
    • sam on Faces In Sand: “Northcode, For your information. Posted earlier further up the thread. In 1778 Scots law rejected slavery. The Court of Session…” Oct 20, 15:00
    • Northcode on Faces In Sand: “I’m not debating intent or moral responsibility. My point throughout has been purely structural: participation by elites is not the…” Oct 20, 14:41
    • Hatey McHateface on Faces In Sand: ““I daresay, this is actually quite amusing in its own right” Hmmm. Aren’t you an “outsider” though? This requires prior…” Oct 20, 14:27
    • Hatey McHateface on Faces In Sand: ““Something has happened to the last two generations” There’s a world of difference between destitute people who emigrate to make…” Oct 20, 14:24
    • Captain Caveman on Faces In Sand: “You’re tying yourself into knots again, aren’t you Northy? A right old cul-de-sac there. I daresay, this is actually quite…” Oct 20, 14:09
    • Hatey McHateface on Faces In Sand: ““thus establishing that no person could be held as a slave under Scots law” Fascinating. Take the underage Scottish lassies,…” Oct 20, 14:08
    • sam on Faces In Sand: “Robert Wedderburn was the illegitimate child of James Wedderburn and a black slave, Rosanna. His early life shaped his attitudes…” Oct 20, 14:03
  • A tall tale



↑ Top