Former Labour minister Peter Kilfoyle earned the nickname “Witchfinder General” in the 1980s, as the party’s enforcer in the battle against Militant. Critics of Momentum often compare it to Militant. So Kilfoyle, who wrote a book about his experiences in the struggle against Militant, seems a good person to ask whether such a comparison is fair.

The idea for interviewing Kilfoyle came from a Guardian reader in response to this Labour & Liverpool project. The reader emailed to point to a blog Kilfoyle had written about next year’s election for metro mayor, a new position comparable to the London mayor and which brings together Liverpool, Halton, Knowsley, St Helens, Sefton and Wirral.

The reader seemed puzzled that Kilfoyle, given his background – he was one of the original team of four that Tony Blair asked to help organise his campaign for leadership in 1994 – appeared to be opposed to the “establishment” candidate, Joe Anderson, the present mayor of Liverpool. Did this mean Kilfoyle was supporting instead Steve Rotheram, Jeremy Corbyn’s parliamentary private secretary (PPS)? I replied that I would ask him.

The ballot for the Labour nominee – MP Luciana Berger completes the trio – closes on Friday 5 August and the result is expected to be announced on Wednesday 10 August.

Kilfoyle, aged 70, was one of a family of 14, worked in Liverpool docks, became a teacher, and in 1986 was appointed Labour regional organiser for the north-west and then in 1991 elected MP for Liverpool Walton until 2010.



I met Kilfoyle this week in the lounge of the Hard Days Night hotel in central Liverpool. Below is a complete transcript of the interview; you can listen to audio here.

Ewen MacAskill: You had a reputation as sort of Witchfinder General, the sort of scourge of Militant, the person that stood up, took them on, so you are well-placed to make the comparison with, when you see Momentum now, is there any comparison with Militant or is it completely different beast?

Peter Kilfoyle: “I don’t see any real comparison with Militant which was a tightly organised, highly motivated group with a particular ideological stance, quite clear and with a strategy which had been well thought out and which was inimical to the interests of the Labour party. I have never seen anything remotely to suggest that this Momentum is anything like that.

“I see it more as a reaction to Progress, representing the rightward elements of the Labour party, and Momentum taking up the cause of the left. It is as simple as that. I really do not see a comparison between the 1980s and today in that regard.”

Have you come across many people from Momentum? What are they like?

“Not personally, no. I have met a lot people who you would identify maybe as Momentum material. I don’t know whether they are in Momentum or not. And they are not all just young people. But a lot of people who are idealistic, who find what they consider the middle ground as being a repugnant position for Labour to take. They want more socialism as opposed to watered-down Toryism. That is the way they would describe it. That is the way they see it. And the people themselves are a rather attractive grouping of people. But the other thing I would say about them: an awful lot of it is a reaction to years and years of – these people seem to be reacting – to years and years of frustration with what they see as a Labour party and a Labour leadership which does not reflect their priorities. Simple.”

What do you make of Corbyn?

“Well, I knew Jeremy, obviously, for the years I was in parliament. He seems an amiable kind of a bloke. I would never have described him as a leader. I never voted for him. I would not have nominated him. But the fact is he seems to be sort of riding this wave in which he encapsulates everything that a lot of people in the party aspire to and on another level he rejects those things that they reject. I have had this conversation with people, including people in the party leadership, and I have made the point very simply. He did not draw up the rules. He stood. He was elected. You accept that. He is the leader. In the same way I didn’t nominate [Gordon] Brown. I thought Brown was a very destructive force in the Labour party. But once he became leader, I accepted him as a leader. That’s called party discipline. Unfortunately, too many people feel that they can’t do that in the case of Corbyn.”

Labour & Liverpool: Peter Kilfoyle interview - audio Read more

You were talking about Gordon Brown and how you can trace back some of Labour’s problems to 1994 [when Brown failed to contest the leadership with Tony Blair]?

“No doubt, Gordon Brown from 1994 onwards – once Blair had won the leadership of the Labour party – he [Brown] was determined that he was going to have his day in the sun. I am not knocking him for his ambition. That’s him. But what he set out to do in my view was to destroy any potential challenger to be the successor of Blair and, in doing so, he took out a whole, if you like, generation of potential Labour leaders. So what you end up with today is a huge gap when you are looking around. Where are the potential leaders that might have led the party onwards and upwards? They are not there because I am afraid those conditions were laid down by Brown effectively.”

The competition between Corbyn and Owen Smith. Who do you think is going to emerge the winner from that?

“I think it will be Corbyn. And I think in part it won’t only be people who voted for him before but a lot of people who were enraged by what they see as a coordinated plot to undermine him and some of it has been downright silly, let’s be honest. It’s been what I consider student politics, amateurish, and it reflects what we said before about lack of real leadership, real authority and real, real deep thinking about the future of the Labour party. So I am quite sure that he will emerge as the successful winner in this contest with Smith. I don’t know Smith. I know nothing about him. But again, reflecting the fact that these are the new kids on the block maybe and maybe they are a little bit wet behind the ears.”

On another subject. On the nominations for the metro mayor [in Liverpool]. Why should this matter? Where does that fit into the big context of what is happening to Labour? I know it is a local thing but it is also…

“It is more than local because again I think a lot of people have looked north of the border to Scotland and, indeed, to Wales and seen how devolved powers can be used to reflect local priorities a little better. And particularly for the regions of England, many of them are bereft of the kind of support which they need in these difficult times. So it was superficially attractive when [George] Osborne came up with his northern powerhouse stuff but in practical terms if the powers are to be devolved, again it would be an opportunity if you like to take on – they are not regions, they are sub-regions, city regions – in a way I think which better reflects the needs of people in the area.

“I have been very impressed by some of the things I saw in America. Can I just tell you about one? It was in Minneapolis quite some years ago and the mayor there had been on the Hill in Washington as a representative for about 22 years, I think, and he had handled one of these House committees which dealt with billions, if not trillions, of dollars. And I was talking to him and I said ‘Don’t you find this a little bit of a letdown for you as a politician after all that power on the Hill?’ And he said, ‘No, in fact, you just become like a glorified accountant on the Hill. Here I actually see the results of the decisions I take.’ Now it was very well set up and very well organised. The problem that we have got is, it seems to me, is we are not that well set up, not that well organised. Because actually, trying to work with so many councils and councillors will not be effective. What you need to give legitimacy in terms of governance, I think, is some kind of board of supervisors, who have the responsibility, as indeed happens with the London mayor where you know he has to – or if it was a woman, it would be she, of course – to go before these people to be cross-examined, to be scrutinised on what they are doing. That doesn’t happen now. Partly because there is no requirement for this. It is assumed it will be the case, I think. But, of course, the Labour party rules are silent on it. And the Tories couldn’t care less. The Tories say, well, it is up to the electorate. But you know somebody can do a lot of damage in one period of office and that has been shown in parts of the country.”

Who would you support among the ... looks like three candidates for the Labour nomination?

“I think of the three that are going up, I would have to support Steve Rotheram. I have not supported him in the sense I have not been involved in his campaign. I am no longer part of all that. But of the three candidates, I think he is the best-suited candidate. Because he has got that experience of Whitehall and Westminster which I think will be essential when you are dealing with trying to get things out of government. And, of course, he was a very successful lord mayor here in Liverpool as well. So he has got the local government background that ideally suits him. And I think he has got a manner and a way, a listening way, and a determination to be inclusive which I think is going to be vital for the smaller communities in these urban areas which will be transformed into the city regions.”

One of the Guardian readers [of the Labour & Liverpool series] saw your blog and was surprised. He thought ‘Peter Kilfoyle. He has a reputation as a rightwinger but he is supporting Steve Rotherham who is a sort of Momentum/Corbyn candidate?’“Steve Rotheram is not in Momentum or anything else. What Steve Rotheram is: he took the job, I think, with a degree of naivety actually in my view, as PPS [parliamentary private secretary] to Jeremy Corbyn. But you see he is showing, as is Andy Burnham over in Manchester, they are showing loyalty to something which is beyond something that might seem superficially attractive at the moment. They realise the Labour party needs stability and you need to be taking on a Tory government that is running riot, if you like, with the interests of this country. So I think he has been absolutely right. I was speaking to Steve last night. And I know he is not a member of Momentum or anyone else…”

I just meant he has the support of Momentum.

“Well, he has shown support for Jeremy Corbyn. He is his PPS and I would expect him to. It is a pity some more people didn’t put loyalty to the party before what they saw as their own specific interest.”

When the Guardian reader said you were a rightwinger, is that a mischaracterisation?

“I have been called a rightwinger. I have been called a leftwinger. I have been called everything. So I just … I never thought in terms of left and right. I always thought in terms of right and wrong. I mean people who, for example, they want to call me a rightwinger sketch over my opposition to the Iraq war. They sketch over the fact … my opposition to tuition fees. All this kind of stuff which I did for years. And, of course, I am retired now so,it is water off a duck’s back. But it is amazing how the record gets massaged over time.”

Your position is basically you do not like Joe Anderson. You do not think he would be good…

“Nothing personal against Joe Anderson as such. I don’t think he has been a very good mayor for the city. I think the city has had a lot of bread and circuses [as] I describe it. Like today the announcement of a bid, a bid for the Commonwealth Games. It is all very nice but of course it depends on an 80% grant from government and finding another 20% from somewhere. But when you look at the actual record, it is not about Joe as a person. It is about how the city has been run. And it is the second lowest authority in the country in terms of economic growth, according to the Office of National Statistics. There is only East Lincolnshire which has done worse, believe it or not. On Greater Merseyside, Liverpool is the only economy which has contracted. All the surrounding districts have expanded. So there is something going wrong here. And I worry that underneath all the glitter and glitz of things which happen in the city centre the wider issues of the city are being lost somewhere and, of course, if that was to be extended into the wider conurbation when we have a city region, it could be disastrous. Particularly coming up to 2017, next year, because Joe has said that the cash runs out. The official audit report on the city said that in 2018 the city will go broke. Now I am not somebody to gainsay the Office of National Statistics but it is worrying about the way in which the city is being run.”

If it went bust, what would that mean in practical terms?

“Goodness knows. It would mean commissioners having to come in, I would think, in the first place and you would think there would be even more horrendous cuts than we have suffered hitherto.”

Liverpool and Merseyside was one of the big beneficiaries of European Union money. I mean, that’s another potential problem?

“You know, it always fascinated me that Europe and its positive effects through Objective One on Merseyside, it was incredible but we never ever made enough of the fact that Europe was being so helpful in a way in which our own government wasn’t. And we can argue all we like about it being our own money that is being recycled but the fact is it was Bruce Millan and the local MEP at the time, Ken Stewart, who argued the case successfully that we should get this Objective One which eventually went to the Highlands and Islands of Scotland, it went to Cornwall, it went to different parts of the country. But there was probably no constituency which had more money pumped into it than the Liverpool Riverside constituency. Paradoxically, the Liverpool Riverside constituency turned out the lowest vote in European elections. There was a complete disconnect between the reality of what Europe was doing and the actual popular perception of Europe.”

Two more questions. I didn’t mention Luciana Berger. What about her as a potential candidate?

“I don’t think it is a really serious – well, I am sure she is serious about throwing her hat in the ring – but I don’t think she has either the experience or the know-how locally to be successful. I think, to be honest, the biggest advantage she has is in the current political climate is being a woman. I am sure that she will get a lot of women’s votes simply because there aren’t enough women leaders. Everyone accepts that. But I don’t think that in terms of merit that she has that experience I am afraid.

The last question. The reader that I was asking about … said he did not know why he was receiving your blog. Do you send it out as an email or how does it go?

“No, no. I blog people. I do send it to a lot of people, there, councillors, I have a lot of email numbers there. I don’t always send it to them. But if there is one that is particularly pertinent, I have sent it to them, although when they have come back to me and say ‘I don’t want it’, I strike them off.”

Aye. That’s perfect. That’s good and clear. I’ll just turn it off.

“We’ll see how it ends up. With all these photos … I don’t know how newspapers work.”