Corbyn and Sultana Clash Over Membership Portal as Divisions Surface in New Leftwing Party

Published: 19 September ‘2025. The English Chronicle Desk

An extraordinary rift has emerged within the newly formed leftwing political initiative co-led by Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana, raising questions about its internal governance, democratic principles, and long-term viability. The dispute came to public attention on Thursday when Corbyn confirmed that the party had referred an unauthorised membership portal promoted by Sultana to the Information Commissioner’s Office, describing it as a “false membership system” that collected funds and personal data without proper authorisation.

Corbyn’s statement urged supporters to disregard an earlier email sent by Sultana requesting donations and to cancel any direct debits already established. He emphasised that legal advice was being sought and insisted that the portal had been created without the collective approval of the party leadership. “This morning, an unauthorised email was sent to all yourparty.uk supporters with details of a supposed membership portal hosted in a new domain name,” Corbyn said. “Legal advice is being taken. That email should be ignored by all supporters. If direct debits have been set up, they should immediately be cancelled.”

The clash exposed simmering tensions that have accompanied the party’s formation since its staggered announcement in July, highlighting differing visions for its governance and operational structure. Sultana, 31, who was suspended from the Labour Party following her rebellion over the two-child benefit cap, had unilaterally declared herself co-leader of the new party alongside Corbyn, 76. Her announcement came despite internal disagreements regarding the timing, structure, and leadership arrangements of the initiative.

Sultana responded to Corbyn’s statement by claiming that she had been sidelined within the party and frozen out of official communications channels. She defended the creation of the membership portal as a necessary step to “safeguard grassroots involvement” and ensure that supporters could continue to engage meaningfully with the party despite internal obstruction. “My sole motivation has been to safeguard the grassroots involvement that is essential to building this party,” Sultana said. She further accused a faction within the initiative of operating as a “sexist boys’ club,” exerting disproportionate control over financial and constitutional decisions, and blocking the participation of women in the working group.

The dispute underscores deeper disagreements over how the party should function. Corbyn and some of his allies advocate for a more centralised model, with tighter control over finances, membership data, and conference procedures. In contrast, Sultana and her supporters argue for a member-led structure that prioritises democratic participation, transparency, and equitable involvement in decision-making. Allies of Sultana further claimed that one faction within the party was developing a rival membership system that would consolidate funds and information under the control of a select few, thereby undermining democratic principles.

Internal communications reveal that agreements had been made early in the party’s formation to split responsibilities between different factions: one group would manage mailing list data while another would oversee donor information. Sultana’s allies alleged that Corbyn’s supporters breached this arrangement, effectively marginalising her and other members advocating for more inclusive governance. Attempts to resolve the disagreement through private discussions were, according to her team, “stonewalled,” leaving the public launch of the portal as a last resort to maintain grassroots engagement.

The membership portal, launched on the social media platform X, quickly attracted attention and participation from supporters. Within thirty minutes of its unveiling, Sultana celebrated reaching “10,000 paid-up members,” and by early afternoon, she reported that membership had surged to 20,000. She dismissed criticisms claiming the portal was fake as the work of “rightwing bad faith actors,” emphasising that the system was secure and that supporters should continue to register despite high traffic.

Corbyn’s intervention, however, highlighted the intensity of the internal rift. His urgent message, co-signed by all other Independent Alliance MPs except Sultana – including Ayoub Khan, Adnan Hussain, Iqbal Mohamed, and Shockat Adam – reinforced the party’s position that the portal had been unauthorised. This public division has exposed an unprecedented level of scrutiny and media attention for a political initiative that has yet to hold its founding conference.

The disagreements between Corbyn and Sultana are reflective of contrasting political strategies and personal styles. Corbyn has maintained a cautious, deliberative approach to launching the party, preferring collective decision-making and careful coordination among MPs and party organisers. Sultana, in contrast, has pursued a more proactive and assertive strategy, emphasising direct engagement with supporters and the importance of mobilising grassroots enthusiasm. These differences have manifested not only in disputes over the membership portal but also in broader discussions about financial transparency, conference arrangements, and the scope of decision-making authority.

Insiders note that the tension is also generational, reflecting differences in approach between Corbyn’s long-standing political network and a younger cohort advocating for digital-first engagement and more participatory structures. Corbyn’s allies argue that Sultana’s actions constitute “wrecking manoeuvres” intended to disrupt party cohesion, while Sultana’s camp contends that the measures taken by Corbyn’s faction threaten to centralise power in ways that are incompatible with the party’s founding ethos.

The dispute has wider implications for the credibility and stability of the party. Observers suggest that if internal divisions are not resolved ahead of the autumn founding conference, the initiative could struggle to establish itself as a serious political force. The visible fracture risks alienating supporters who are undecided about the party’s legitimacy and may erode confidence in its capacity to function democratically and transparently.

Beyond internal politics, the clash has also attracted attention from the broader UK political landscape. Labour Party observers have noted the potential for the new initiative to fragment left-leaning support, while analysts suggest that disputes such as this may hamper efforts to mobilise a cohesive platform capable of influencing policy or electoral outcomes. The interplay between high-profile personalities, generational divides, and disagreements over governance offers a vivid case study in the challenges faced by nascent political movements attempting to balance leadership authority with grassroots participation.

As of Thursday evening, it remained unclear whether the party would reconcile its differences prior to the autumn conference or if the split between Corbyn and Sultana would intensify. The public statements, both on social media and in formal communications, underscore a lack of consensus on fundamental questions of control, authority, and democratic accountability. Sultana has called for Corbyn to make public all agreed structures, processes, and decision-making protocols, urging transparency and collective ownership of the party’s development.

“This party is more important than any one person, and we all owe it to the movement to deliver a truly democratic and socialist party,” Sultana said. “No stitch-ups, no coronations: the members must decide.” Corbyn’s camp, however, maintains that adherence to procedural protocols and legal oversight is critical to the integrity of the party’s operations, framing Sultana’s unilateral action as a breach of agreed procedures.

The unfolding dispute is likely to shape both internal dynamics and public perceptions in the weeks leading up to the conference. Whether the party can reconcile its leadership tensions, maintain supporter engagement, and uphold a credible, democratic framework will determine its ability to emerge as a sustainable political entity. For now, the clash between Corbyn and Sultana stands as a cautionary tale of the difficulties faced by emergent political movements attempting to balance visionary leadership with inclusive participation and transparency.