Anyone a monumentem (sp) member?

[BrandNewAndImproved]

Never heard of them before Corbyn. Now they're everywhere.

Bingo!

The 'conspiracy' word came up! No I do not believe it is a conspiracy. I believe it is being managed by one person who is giving no transparency whilst helicoptering in pro-corbyn CLP's to de-selecting anti-Corbyn MP's. That is fact.

I have been a Labour member on and off since 1994 (And I have never used the word 'comrade' in all that time btw). Feel free not to answer my questions - apart from 'it is normal' you haven't any answers

You cannot say how Momentum operates within the party is completely normal unless you can give an example of another 'movement' operating in the same way in the party - there isn't one. Progress is a ginger group. Saving labour has only just been founded

No I am not impartial. And nor are you - and why should either of us be? It took the CLP meeting for me to decide that I didn't like what I was seeing

Yes it is 'normal' for a company to be set up in this way. But Momentum is claiming to be a socialist movement. It is not' normal' for a socialist movement to be set up like this. A socialist 'movement' should be set up as such - why not have more than one director? Why not set up as a co-op? Why not show your structure. Your Governance? There are alternative ways to operate properly in a socialist manner - Momentum does not. It should do.

Winnie So Momentum is just a company then? Not a movement?

No they are not affiliated to the Labour Party . Remember they are a 'movement' .....or a company.....or something

Drama - nope. A social moevment is taking over aspects of a democratic political party and one of it's aims is deselection of MP's. Which could also been inferred that this could mean purging the party of non Corbyn supporters - like me!

sigh

We all call each other "comrade". All our party emails are addressed "comrade". I bet you don't sing the Red Flag at meetings either. Must be just us then. It's a bit "stonemasons", but I like it.

Yes, yes, we're neither of us impartial. So go and campaign for Smith - I honestly would advocate you do! There's more can be achieved that way than by attempting to discredit the opposition, especially in an internal leadership contest. If you discredit half of your own party no-one wins. If you big up your own side at least you can come out as "both sides were great, but our side was better", which is surely better for Labour.

I haven't backed Smith and I am not discrediting 'the opposition'. I don't need to; Momentum are officially not part of the party. This is not about one up manship it's about showing that a socialist 'movement' is not socialist in its structure - kinda important to me but then I don't go in for the ends justify the means approach

Why are Momentum and Corbyn above questioning? And if you do question you are accused of looking for or being part of conspiracy or discrediting or one upmanship. Nope. It is because Momentum concerns me greatly

But it appears if I question and don't fall into line I (goodness I didn't know I had soooo much power) am discrediting half of the party and destroying the party.

The old if you question us you are against us and you are destroying the party line. Reminds me of something

Actually, do you mean affiliated like the trade unions or "Scientists for Labour", that sort of thing? Where being a member makes you an affiliate member of Labour? No, I knew it was different from all of those. I thought you meant it wasn't linked in some sense.

As in officially they are nothing to do with the broader Labout party it is a 'Labour party focused organisation'.

ShowMe I am not a member of Momentum or the Labour Party. I haven't voted for them since Iraq.
You said Momentum had a register at company's house. That could mean they are a company; a charity or a social enterprise. Both of the latter can have a registered company as well as registered charitable status. Whether it is run by one person or not depends on the company structure; the division of shares, etc. For example one charity I worked with was registered both as a company and a charity. The CEO/Director reported to the Board of trustees; the Shareholders were a different group. In that organisation the Director could be removed by the Board; in an Union it could be the membership rather than the board that held control.
My point is that a cursory glance at Companies House doesn't provide the answers to the questions you raised.
I do think they are valid questions. Just as they are valid questions to ask of the new 'movement' announced yesterday.

As in officially they are nothing to do with the broader Labout party it is a 'Labour party focused organisation'.

Ah, okay, gothca. Cheers for that.

Showme, you're quite right, I jumped to some conclusions there. I don't think Momentum are above questioning, but you do sound like you're trying to find the questions that give you the answers you want. Nothing you've said so far makes me in the least bit concerned about their activities if I'm honest, and I assure you I would be open to hearing that! I'd certainly tell my member friends as I wouldn't want them to be associated with something shady, but I honestly don't think they are. You're bashing their corporate entity, their name change, the fact they are obliged to have a named director and their full accounts have not been published off their own back out of no necessity... it's just odd.

Winnie I defer to you, you seem to know much more about the nuts and bolts than me!

eatsleep tbh I haven't looked into Momentum's structure at all. It strikes me that the left are always subjected to so much scrutiny that if there was any hint of impropriety the media would be splashing with that rather than the rather weak 'someone may or may not have walked into an office'.
I have been trying to find out about Saving Labour because its more recent and I thought that information would be available but so far none of the people I have asked (media and politics contacts) seem to know.

Nope - I am trying to get answers to the questions I have. I agree a glance doesn't give me the information - which is why I have contacted Jon Lansman and Momentum and have had no answers. I paid my membership fee - I wanted to know how the movement is structured. I fully understand how companies are structured - which is why I asked

I have asked at local level, at my LP, at Momentum national and the owner - nothing. In fact locally they became very agitated when I asked. Most members do not know it is even a company. That in itself is not an issue but there are socialist ways to run companies - they are not doing this. There are ways to give transparency - they are not doing this

Agreed any movement should have the same questions asked - I have joined that one too and will ask them as I have concerns about how it will operate (buying votes concerns etc me) At the moment Momentum is more of a concern as they are succeeding in trying to create pro Corbyn CLP's just in order to deselect

I might have a look into Momentum later because I do find all of this fascinating.

Winnie good luck finding anything out about Saving Labour! Here's what Labour List have to say. The scandal I hear is about Reg Race who is now a medical entrepreneur, running or linked to an NHS contractor apparently. Apart from that they decline to give interviews as to their intentions and no-one is publicly claiming involvement/authority. You won't find them on Companies House.

But I'm equally "meh" about that. I don't know if it's particularly strange to be secretive about your instigators under the current circumstances in the party. I don't know if they'd even need to be registered if they have no employees for example, so that's probably normal too, I'm no expert. But certainly they're more opaque as an organisation that Momentum.

It is interesting. Other concerns of mine are beyond keeping Corbyn in power there is no plan. So my view is the party is very likely to split maybe soon - then what? They become the core of Corbyns party I guess which is fine. The difficulty that the group has is that there is no real vision as a movement beyond Corbyn. What about when he leaves or retires etc. So much work is needed. The tenants of Momentums social movement have great value but they are not really thought through beyond the words themselves.

It is kind of like the Leave campaign but for one person. Lots of different groups campaigning for the same thing - but with no plan for after it is achieved. And I think it get Corbyn his own splinter party - but won't get the whole party ( and I am not happy about the split just think it is now inevitable)

Perhaps I misunderstood your motives Showme, I'm sorry. I'm afraid that's all the information I have, and much of that is speculation - I don't want to speculate further as I'm sure I'll be incorrect!

At the moment Momentum is more of a concern as they are succeeding in trying to create pro Corbyn CLP's just in order to deselect

On this statement though, just be careful: perhaps they are "succeeding" in some sort of conversion project where they either "convert" LP member to "Corbynism", or perhaps they sign up "Corbynistas" to the Labour Party...But be careful it isn't the case that LP members in your CLP aren't just pro-Corbyn of their own accord, and joining Momentum because of that! Similarly new members, perhaps they really are just Labour espousers who are inspired by Corbyn, have joined the party and Momentum and clearly want to come along to meeting at this fraught and precarious time! Momentum haven't "infiltrated" our CLP, although they're well represented, and as I've said the vibe is predominantly Pro-Corbyn. Bu the Pro-Corbyn feeling came before the connection with Momentum from what I've seen, not the other way round.

I think experiences of Momentum might vary according to where you are. I attended a Momentum meeting out of curiosity and there was nothing about stacking CLP meetings or the like (in fact the CLP in my area was re-elected the same officers following the Momentum meeting and there were no challenges to it). The main discussion was about building local support for a campaign to keep libraries open and librarians in jobs. We did also have a mix of people and no SWP from what I could tell so very different experience to Showme.

eat that may be so - in which case that is also wrong. I will take a look too. We need to have transparency about all the movements that are influencing the party. No matter what side they are on

We need to have transparency about all the movements that are influencing the party. No matter what side they are on

Absolutely agree with you here.

I am a LP member. Something about Momentum sat badly with me and I haven't had anything much to do with them. I could be right or I could be wrong.

eat I wish that was the case - I attended a Momentum meeting in which they said their aims were to establish pro Corbyn CLP Execs (they had just got some elected to one and had gone en masse to ensure election) in order to ensure they had pro-corbyn MP's

I really wish that wasn't what I heard but I did - that is why I am so concerned. It alienates those of us who do not feel the same way and want people nominated and elected on merits not who they support

Well I'm torn about that to be honest. I can totally understand why that would be alienating and unpleasant for you. But also I can see that we're a pretty poorly functioning opposition with Corbyn as leader with MPs who don't support him. Either the leader needs replacing or the MPs need replacing, so they're only trying to do right by the party by trying to replace the half of that equation they don't agree with with one that will pull in the same direction as the half they DO agree with! It's only the same thing the other side are doing by trying to replace Corbyn and his supporters. But I share your frustration it's come to this! It's not nice being on the other side of the fence at the moment either, I assure you.

A company's annual return is not the same as its accounts.

As it is a very new company, it does not have to file accounts until 24 March 2017, having only just had its year end on 30 June 2016. TBF, preparing accounts within 2 months of the year end would be quite unusual, as it can take some time to collate records, and then for the accounts to be prepared.

If I were a "member" of momentum, I would be quite concerned that I was paying towards something I ultimately had no say in.

It's not like a registered charity which has charitable aims it must adhere to. The "members" have, in effect, given their money to Mr Jon Lansman (the sole subscriber to the company) to do what he wants with.

A bit like crowd funding. You think you're paying towards someone's medical bills, but you could be paying for their Caribbean holiday. Or for them to give it all to the SWP, if they saw fit.

Info on the Momentum name change from Huffpost here

Ahh eat if only it wasn't the HuffPuff. I try not to read them since they don't pay most of their writers. Not only do I think that's immoral (since they are a massive company) but I also think it leads to shoddy journalism. At least if you're paying your writers you can demand a certain level of journalistic integrity/research/ability.

Interesting but it is the Telegraph so has an agenda

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/12060177/The-cheerleader-for-Corbyn-who-supports-sons-schemes-to-sell-off-homeless-hostels.html