Details emerge of Scottish arm of new Jeremy Corbyn party
The day after Corbyn's announcement, suspended Labour MP Zarah Sultana announced she had quit to join the new party, which she said she would co-lead with Corbyn.
Rumours quickly flew around whether or not there would be a Scottish branch of the new party when it is eventually set up.
A source told The National that a small group of left-leaning Scots have been working behind the scenes to prepare the Scottish arm ahead of the Holyrood election. However, with the party not yet fully-fledged, how many, if any, candidates it will stand is still up in the air.
Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana (Image: Stefan Rousseau/PA)On Saturday, a group called Collective Scotland published a statement confirming it had indeed been working towards a new party.
Collective is a movement which is working to build towards and begin a mass-membership party of the left. It is behind the new party referenced by Sultana, but is not a new party in its own right.
The statement by the Collective Scotland, the group's Scottish branch, was shared by several figures on social media, such as pro-independence outlet Bella Caledonia, Govanhill writer and poet Jim Monaghan, and the Scottish Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition.
In it, the group indicated it was looking to build "a full-fledged electoral alliance of the Scottish left" for next year's election.
READ MORE: Devolved relations reset with Labour has 'failed', says SNP official
While the statement did not mention Corbyn or Sultana directly, it said that "as the left across Britain comes together to form a new political party, the Scottish left now has a similar opportunity to unite".
It added: "With the SNP stagnant after 18 years of government, with the Labour party a hollow shell of itself, and the looming threat of Reform and the far-right, the time is ripe for a new progressive, left-wing consensus to form in Scotland.
"Collective Scotland is already engaged in discussions towards a conference of progressives and socialists to take place on October 4th in Glasgow. We invite all those groups and parties not already engaged in this project to join us.
"At that conference, we will look to build a full-fledged electoral alliance of the Scottish left to run in the 2026 Scottish Parliament elections, and build towards longer-term campaigns in our local communities for the 2027 Scottish local elections.
"In partnership with our left allies, we will seek to present a programme which takes away greed and personal enrichment from Scotland's political structures, and gives renewal to our local public services and democracy."
The statement continued: "A trend that must be broken in our political traditions is to assume that all politics happens at just Holyrood or one's local council chamber. We want to be more than just an electoral alliance for Scotland's left; we want to be the link to a wider progressive social movement.
"We look forward now, as an autonomous party of Scotland's progressives and socialists, to the coalition and partnerships we must build for all of Scotland's left to succeed, not just as a set of parties, but as a wider movement."
The focus of Collective has primarily been in the UK Parliament, as this is where the elected representatives that would form a party are based.
However, The National understands that the Collective Scotland branch and other left groups have been working since the end of 2024 towards some form of alliance or coalition for next year's Holyrood election.
READ MORE: Cabinet minister refuses to confirm if two-child cap will be scrapped
A source close to the organisation told The National: "In Scotland, we have been working as a small group of people in Collective since the end of last year, meeting with other left groups in Scotland who already have initiatives going about how to work together.
"There's only a very small group of people, all we're really doing is preparing the way for a new party to happen. In the end, it'll be up to the members to decide how to proceed from there."
The National understands that the group is not clear on whether it will be standing candidates under a new party at next year's Holyrood election.
While the group may stand candidates in a few constituencies, it may also decide to back another coalition or alliance.
On independence, the source stressed that the party's policy would be determined by its members, and could be changed or altered.
But they said: "We, at least in Collective Scotland, support the idea of self-determination and support the power to call and hold a referendum."
They added that they believed this power "should lie with the Scottish Parliament, not the UK Parliament."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South Wales Argus
an hour ago
- South Wales Argus
Ministers face fresh challenge to welfare reforms in Wednesday votes
The Department for Work and Pensions will try to steer the Universal Credit Bill through its final Commons stages, including clause-by-clause scrutiny, on Wednesday. The Bill, if agreed to, would roll out two different rates of benefit for claimants who cannot currently work. It would also freeze the limited capability for work and work-related activity (LCW and LCWRA) elements of the benefit until 2030. The PA news agency understands that a 'substantial number' of Labour rebels have agreed to vote to gut the Bill of these reforms, if they can trigger a division. When MPs debated the reforms last week, Government frontbenchers rolled back on their plan to reform the separate personal independence payment (Pip) benefit, vowing to revisit any proposed changes only after a review by social security minister Sir Stephen Timms. 'The Government for all the goodwill of pulling clause five on Pip, they've lost it over being so stubborn and obstinate over clauses two and three,' Labour MP for York Central Rachael Maskell said. Clause two of the Bill includes a framework for two rates of LCWRA, with claimants who are eligible for the benefit before April 2026 able to claim a higher rate than later applicants. Claimants who are terminally ill or who have severe symptoms of an illness which 'constantly' apply would also be eligible for the higher rate, regardless of when they become eligible. Ms Maskell has proposed a change to the reforms, so that someone who has slipped out of and then back into the LCWRA eligibility criteria either side of April 2026 would still be able to claim the higher rate. Approving this change would be like 'gathering up the crumbs rather than getting the full course meal', she said. Asked what the Government should do to tackle welfare costs, Ms Maskell told the PA news agency: 'We've got to put the early interventions in to take people off this path of ill health. 'We've got quite a sick society at the moment for all the reasons that we know, a broken NHS, you know, social care not being where it should be, and of course long-term Covid. 'All of that is having its impact, and the endemic mental health challenges that people are facing. 'But to then have the confidence that your programme is so good that it's going to get loads of these people into work and employers are going to have to fulfil their obligations in the future hopefully after the Charlie Mayfield report (the Keep Britain Working review) will make those recommendations – all of that, great, as far as it goes. 'But what we can't do is leave those people that can't work in poverty, because they would love to work and earn money, but they can't, so we have to pay for it. 'And therefore the people who've got the good fortune of earning money, whether it's through income or assets, they're the people that are going to have to support a wider society.' Labour MP for Poole Neil Duncan-Jordan proposed gutting the Bill through a series of draft amendments, to strike clause two and cancel the freeze in clause three. He and Ms Maskell were two of 49 MPs who unsuccessfully tried to block the Bill at second reading, when it cleared its first Commons hurdle by 335 votes to 260, majority 75. Amid fears the Bill had been rushed through Parliament, and referring to the Liberal reformer William Beveridge who published a post-war blueprint for the welfare state in 1942, Mr Duncan-Jordan asked: 'Beveridge didn't design the welfare state on the back of a postage stamp, did he?' Beyond changes to parts of the benefit specifically for people who cannot currently work, the Bill would demand an above-inflation rise to the universal credit standard allowance each year until 2030.
Western Telegraph
an hour ago
- Western Telegraph
Ministers face fresh challenge to welfare reforms in Wednesday votes
The Department for Work and Pensions will try to steer the Universal Credit Bill through its final Commons stages, including clause-by-clause scrutiny, on Wednesday. The Bill, if agreed to, would roll out two different rates of benefit for claimants who cannot currently work. It would also freeze the limited capability for work and work-related activity (LCW and LCWRA) elements of the benefit until 2030. The PA news agency understands that a 'substantial number' of Labour rebels have agreed to vote to gut the Bill of these reforms, if they can trigger a division. When MPs debated the reforms last week, Government frontbenchers rolled back on their plan to reform the separate personal independence payment (Pip) benefit, vowing to revisit any proposed changes only after a review by social security minister Sir Stephen Timms. 'The Government for all the goodwill of pulling clause five on Pip, they've lost it over being so stubborn and obstinate over clauses two and three,' Labour MP for York Central Rachael Maskell said. Clause two of the Bill includes a framework for two rates of LCWRA, with claimants who are eligible for the benefit before April 2026 able to claim a higher rate than later applicants. Claimants who are terminally ill or who have severe symptoms of an illness which 'constantly' apply would also be eligible for the higher rate, regardless of when they become eligible. Ms Maskell has proposed a change to the reforms, so that someone who has slipped out of and then back into the LCWRA eligibility criteria either side of April 2026 would still be able to claim the higher rate. Approving this change would be like 'gathering up the crumbs rather than getting the full course meal', she said. Asked what the Government should do to tackle welfare costs, Ms Maskell told the PA news agency: 'We've got to put the early interventions in to take people off this path of ill health. 'We've got quite a sick society at the moment for all the reasons that we know, a broken NHS, you know, social care not being where it should be, and of course long-term Covid. 'All of that is having its impact, and the endemic mental health challenges that people are facing. 'But to then have the confidence that your programme is so good that it's going to get loads of these people into work and employers are going to have to fulfil their obligations in the future hopefully after the Charlie Mayfield report (the Keep Britain Working review) will make those recommendations – all of that, great, as far as it goes. 'But what we can't do is leave those people that can't work in poverty, because they would love to work and earn money, but they can't, so we have to pay for it. 'And therefore the people who've got the good fortune of earning money, whether it's through income or assets, they're the people that are going to have to support a wider society.' Labour MP for Poole Neil Duncan-Jordan proposed gutting the Bill through a series of draft amendments, to strike clause two and cancel the freeze in clause three. He and Ms Maskell were two of 49 MPs who unsuccessfully tried to block the Bill at second reading, when it cleared its first Commons hurdle by 335 votes to 260, majority 75. Amid fears the Bill had been rushed through Parliament, and referring to the Liberal reformer William Beveridge who published a post-war blueprint for the welfare state in 1942, Mr Duncan-Jordan asked: 'Beveridge didn't design the welfare state on the back of a postage stamp, did he?' Beyond changes to parts of the benefit specifically for people who cannot currently work, the Bill would demand an above-inflation rise to the universal credit standard allowance each year until 2030.
Rhyl Journal
an hour ago
- Rhyl Journal
Ministers face fresh challenge to welfare reforms in Wednesday votes
The Department for Work and Pensions will try to steer the Universal Credit Bill through its final Commons stages, including clause-by-clause scrutiny, on Wednesday. The Bill, if agreed to, would roll out two different rates of benefit for claimants who cannot currently work. It would also freeze the limited capability for work and work-related activity (LCW and LCWRA) elements of the benefit until 2030. The PA news agency understands that a 'substantial number' of Labour rebels have agreed to vote to gut the Bill of these reforms, if they can trigger a division. When MPs debated the reforms last week, Government frontbenchers rolled back on their plan to reform the separate personal independence payment (Pip) benefit, vowing to revisit any proposed changes only after a review by social security minister Sir Stephen Timms. 'The Government for all the goodwill of pulling clause five on Pip, they've lost it over being so stubborn and obstinate over clauses two and three,' Labour MP for York Central Rachael Maskell said. Clause two of the Bill includes a framework for two rates of LCWRA, with claimants who are eligible for the benefit before April 2026 able to claim a higher rate than later applicants. Claimants who are terminally ill or who have severe symptoms of an illness which 'constantly' apply would also be eligible for the higher rate, regardless of when they become eligible. Ms Maskell has proposed a change to the reforms, so that someone who has slipped out of and then back into the LCWRA eligibility criteria either side of April 2026 would still be able to claim the higher rate. Approving this change would be like 'gathering up the crumbs rather than getting the full course meal', she said. Asked what the Government should do to tackle welfare costs, Ms Maskell told the PA news agency: 'We've got to put the early interventions in to take people off this path of ill health. 'We've got quite a sick society at the moment for all the reasons that we know, a broken NHS, you know, social care not being where it should be, and of course long-term Covid. 'All of that is having its impact, and the endemic mental health challenges that people are facing. 'But to then have the confidence that your programme is so good that it's going to get loads of these people into work and employers are going to have to fulfil their obligations in the future hopefully after the Charlie Mayfield report (the Keep Britain Working review) will make those recommendations – all of that, great, as far as it goes. 'But what we can't do is leave those people that can't work in poverty, because they would love to work and earn money, but they can't, so we have to pay for it. 'And therefore the people who've got the good fortune of earning money, whether it's through income or assets, they're the people that are going to have to support a wider society.' Labour MP for Poole Neil Duncan-Jordan proposed gutting the Bill through a series of draft amendments, to strike clause two and cancel the freeze in clause three. He and Ms Maskell were two of 49 MPs who unsuccessfully tried to block the Bill at second reading, when it cleared its first Commons hurdle by 335 votes to 260, majority 75. Amid fears the Bill had been rushed through Parliament, and referring to the Liberal reformer William Beveridge who published a post-war blueprint for the welfare state in 1942, Mr Duncan-Jordan asked: 'Beveridge didn't design the welfare state on the back of a postage stamp, did he?' Beyond changes to parts of the benefit specifically for people who cannot currently work, the Bill would demand an above-inflation rise to the universal credit standard allowance each year until 2030.
