Recent events in Brent – where some incumbent Labour councillors reportedly weren’t reselected for the 2026 elections (Wembley Matters) as the selections were made by the London region of the Labour Party and not the local Labour members – signal a troubling trend: local voices being sidelined by national gatekeepers. This not only erodes the goodwill of grassroots activists but also contributes to a growing sense of disenfranchisement.
The practice in Brent is not an isolated anomaly – but part of an emerging Labour pattern. Leicester, Bristol, Kirklees, and Sefton have all shown how national-level oversight, when misused, can fracture local democracies.
If Labour doesn’t recalibrate, it risks further erosion of trust – and the local electoral ground it needs for 2026 and beyond.
For the 2023 Leicester City Council election, the Labour National Executive Committee (NEC) intervened directly due to internal strife, overseeing candidate selections. The result: 19 sitting councillors were deselected. Shockingly, 58% of deselected councillors were from BAME backgrounds compared to just 18% of white councillors – raising serious concerns about equity and representation. (Wikipedia).
Ahead of the 2021 Bristol City Council election, Labour’s candidate selection was managed not locally but by paid officials from the South West Labour Party’s regional office. This move, replacing local oversight, led to banned candidates and resignations among activists frustrated by the top-down approach. (ibid)
Central meddling isn’t confined to deselections – it reverberates. In Merseyside’s Sefton Council, multiple resignations occurred as councillors objected to policy directions and handling of national issues, such as the war in Gaza. (ibid)
In Kirklees, defeats and internal tensions led to mass resignations and defections to independent groups, diminishing local Labour control and further fragmenting governance. (ibid)
For a healthy local democracy, the central political party’s role should be supportive, not authoritarian.
The practice in Brent is not an isolated anomaly – but part of an emerging Labour pattern. Leicester, Bristol, Kirklees, and Sefton have all shown how national-level oversight, when misused, can fracture local democracies.
If Labour doesn’t recalibrate, it risks further erosion of trust – and the local electoral ground it needs for 2026 and beyond.
For the 2023 Leicester City Council election, the Labour National Executive Committee (NEC) intervened directly due to internal strife, overseeing candidate selections. The result: 19 sitting councillors were deselected. Shockingly, 58% of deselected councillors were from BAME backgrounds compared to just 18% of white councillors – raising serious concerns about equity and representation. (Wikipedia).
Ahead of the 2021 Bristol City Council election, Labour’s candidate selection was managed not locally but by paid officials from the South West Labour Party’s regional office. This move, replacing local oversight, led to banned candidates and resignations among activists frustrated by the top-down approach. (ibid)
Central meddling isn’t confined to deselections – it reverberates. In Merseyside’s Sefton Council, multiple resignations occurred as councillors objected to policy directions and handling of national issues, such as the war in Gaza. (ibid)
In Kirklees, defeats and internal tensions led to mass resignations and defections to independent groups, diminishing local Labour control and further fragmenting governance. (ibid)
For a healthy local democracy, the central political party’s role should be supportive, not authoritarian.
Harrow Monitoring Group 