Labour insiders have described an internal analysis of the role Labour's controversial community organisers played in the general election as "propaganda" and a "silly document".



The community organiser roles were created under Jeremy Corbyn's tenure and were designed to "organise around local issues and develop campaigns", but the positions have been controversial, with a view among some in the party that the project had failed to deliver results, and was not worth the estimated price tag of almost three million pounds over two years.

The leaked report, presented at a meeting of Labour's National Executive committee today, suggested there was a direct correlation between the presence of community organisers in key seats and an improved result.

However, Labour Party and trade union sources have poured cold water on the claims, saying that it was "a work of fiction" and "a silly document".

One trade union source was heavily critical of the document, suggesting that Labour's ruling body, the NEC, should have thrown it out.

"I'm amazed that the NEC accepted a report like that, that is so light on quantatitive data," they told BuzzFeed News.

The trade union source said the analysis failed to take into account demographic changes, pointing out that in many seats singled out in the document the characteristics of the electorate, such as a higher proportion of students, were as likely to be responsible for a better Labour result as community organisers, and that a true analysis would need to compare seats with similar demographics.

"If they wanted to demonstrate outperforming seats, it should be demonstrated in seats that are demographically similar," they said.

They also pointed out that the Broxtowe contact rate had been compared to the average for the entire East Midlands and not the other East Midlands key seats — which means the result is skewed by including safe Tory seats where no campaigning will have been done.

The source also highlighted the fact that there were no months listed on the comparison between contact rates in 2017 and 2019, and suggested that comparing calendar years would give a different result to comparing general elections.

