Archive item

Hattersley clashes with Grant on Black Section

Preview image for Hattersley clashes with Grant on Black Section

About this item

This document reports on a heated dispute within the Labour Party over the formation of "black sections," groups aimed at increasing political participation among Black communities. Bernie Grant, a prominent Black Labour politician, planned to attend a rally in Birmingham supporting these sections despite opposition from senior Labour figures including Roy Hattersley. The controversy highlights tensions around race, representation, and party unity in 1980s British politics.

Key points:
– Bernie Grant and Linda Bellos intended to attend a Birmingham rally launching a ‘black section’ of the Labour Party, which the party’s National Executive Committee had declared unnecessary and illegal.
– Roy Hattersley and other Birmingham Labour MPs opposed the rally, writing to Grant and Bellos to discourage their involvement and asserting that local Labour structures were already addressing racial equality.
– Birmingham MPs emphasized their commitment to racial equality but criticized Grant and Bellos for interfering locally and suggested they focus on their own councils.
– Black section supporters argued the movement aimed to increase Black political engagement and accountability, opposing the NEC’s ban as undemocratic and lacking Black community consent.
– Amir Khan, recently readmitted to the Labour Party, was named chairman of the Birmingham black section; he had previously been expelled amid earlier internal disputes.

This clash reflects Bernie Grant’s broader activism for Black political representation and the challenges faced by Black Labour politicians advocating for institutional change in the 1980s. The push for black sections was part of wider efforts to combat racial discrimination and enable greater Black participation within British political parties, amid resistance from some party establishment figures.

Source note: The OCR transcript is reasonably clear, though some sections contain minor inconsistencies typical of scanned text. All interpretation is based on the available text without further contextual assumptions.

Archive Metadata

Archive reference
BG/P/11/5/2
Pages
1
Original file
view?usp=sharing