It was a scene to bring back memories not just of the Jeremy Corbyn era, but the full-blooded Labour struggles of the Seventies and Eighties — a time when the unions terrified governments of both colours, and when the hard-Left still exercised raw muscle.
Last Thursday evening, the once pro-Soviet Morning Star held a “readers meeting” in the lounge bar of the Tyneside Irish Centre, just opposite St James’s Park, the home of Newcastle United. With people perched around the small round tables, many supping pints of Guinness, the average age must have been well over 60.
A speaker from Women Against Pit Closures, roused the 70-strong audience by saying she wanted a working-class revolt on the streets. “We’ve never, really, truly had a socialist government,” she declared, denouncing Tony Blair and calling Neil Kinnock a “traitor”. A pro-Palestinian campaigner repeatedly accused the Israelis of “genocide” in Gaza, without once condemning Hamas’s own attack.
Sitting on the platform and soaking this all in was their star speaker: Jamie Driscoll, the current North of Tyne Mayor. One of the youngest in the room at 53, Driscoll only became a politician six years ago. But he has rapidly become the most interesting and engaging new figure on the British Left. To applause from the crowd, he called for Blair to be tried in the Hague for his part in the Iraq War — before warning that Keir Starmer was a far more “authoritarian” figure. Nye Bevan would not have been selected as a candidate under Starmer. And nor would Starmer himself, he wryly added, since he opposed the Iraq War.
Viewed in this light, the event will have reassured Starmer’s high command that they were right to fear Driscoll when, last year, they blocked him from becoming Labour’s candidate for Mayor of the North East, a new position due to be elected by local voters next week. He was too much of a dissident and snubbed from the shortlist.
Driscoll’s offence was to have chaired a meeting at a Newcastle theatre last March with Ken Loach, in which he interviewed the socialist film director about his long career in cinema. The setting seemed apt since three of Loach’s recent films — including the award-winning I, Daniel Blake — were set on Tyneside. But that didn’t matter. Three years before, Loach had been expelled from Labour for alleged antisemitism; Driscoll soon found himself accused of guilt by association.
So, Driscoll decided instead to stand as an independent, raising almost £200,000 and going on the attack. He pointed out that Starmer had appeared at length in Loach’s 1997 documentary McLibel, which was about his legal work for the two anti-McDonald’s campaigners; Starmer had even included pictures from McLibel in his campaign video for the Labour leadership.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
Subscribe“Nye Bevan would not have been selected as a candidate under Starmer“.
Bevan entered Parliament in 1929, and died in 1960. In that era, socialism still seemed attractive to some people.
Only Jamie has even put out a leaflet. He is the only candidate that most people could name. McGuinness does not turn up to hustings 10 minutes from her home. Most Labour Party members are voting for Jamie, as is everyone, always a sizeable minority in the North East, who fancies giving Labour a bloody nose.
This Jamie Driscoll ?
https://www.facebook.com/itvtynetees/videos/2067438330039115/?mibextid=rS40aB7S9Ucbxw6v
Yes, that one. Beware the chameleon in socialist clothing.
Superb bit of journalism, Mr. Crick – precise, observant and always looking under stones that London-based hacks have not even heard of.
Driscoll sounds an interesting chap. I will follow his career with interest.
Impressive arguments. Obviously the right person. Not a party hack
Elected mayor’s are an unmitigated disaster for democracy.
An appalling Americanism that puts too much power in the hands of a single individual and ultimately the bureaucracy.
Yes Westminster has far too little control.
Actually sarky comments aside I wonder if any of the elected mayor authorities are struggling to make ends meet like most local government is. I suspect not as one individual is accountable rather than a faceless committee.