Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Labour leadership ruling: Tom Watson vows to remain Jeremy Corbyn's deputy even if he loses court battle

Watson's position has been described as 'untenable' if the court case goes against him

Andy McSmith
Thursday 11 August 2016 18:41 BST
Comments
Labour's deputy leader, Tom Watson (left), says Jeremy Corbyn isn't willing to discuss quitting as party leader
Labour's deputy leader, Tom Watson (left), says Jeremy Corbyn isn't willing to discuss quitting as party leader (PA)

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Tom Watson has rubbished suggestions that he could be forced out of his role as Labour’s deputy leader if the party machine loses its current court battle over leadership election rules.

A senior Labour source told The Independent that Mr Watson’s position would be “untenable” if the court ruling – which will come tomorrow – goes against him.

But a spokesman for the deputy leader said: “It’s one of those things that’s never going to happen. How do they suppose they remove him?”

Labour has fought two court battles over rules for the leadership election. In one, the party’s general secretary, Iain McNicol, with Mr Watson’s support, opposed an attempt by a Labour do not, Michael Foster, to get a judge’s ruling that would have made it almost impossible for Jeremy Corbyn to stand for re-election as party leader.

In the other, Mr McNicol is asking for an appeal court ruling that would deny 130,000 newly signed up party members an automatic right to vote in the leadership contest.

In the first court battle, the leader and deputy leader were on the same side of the argument, but in the current one Mr Corbyn has made no secret of his anger that Mr Watson persuaded the executive’s procedures committee to appeal against a ruling delivered by a judge earlier this week. A Labour source suggested that if the appeal failed, Mr Watson should resign, for wasting the party funds.

But his spokesman said: “Why should he? All he has done is support the party’s appeal on the principle that the executive sets the rules, on the same basis that he opposed the Foster action. Are they saying they were wasting money defending the executive against that action?”

Because Mr Watson was directly elected by party members and supporters, the only way he could be forced out of office would be for someone to launch a challenge next summer – but to set the challenge in motion, the challenger would need nominations from at least 51 Labour MPs or MEPs. “Could they get 51 names? I don’t think so,” Mr Watson’s spokesman said.

Mr McNicol is more vulnerable, because he is a party official appointed by the national executive, on which Mr Corbyn looks likely to have a majority by the end of Labour’s annual conference next month. Mr Corbyn and his supporters are angry with the general secretary because they think he has interpreted party rules to the leader’s disadvantage.

A party source said: “If Mr McNicol lost a vote of confidence on the executive, it would clearly be hard for him to continue but I don’t think technically they could sack him as he has the same rights as any other full time employee.

“It would obviously be ironic if he were forced to resign, because Jeremy didn’t resign when MPs said they had no confidence in him.”

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in