Labour’s adoption of the constitutional amendment proposals on antisemitism and discrimination that the Jewish Labour Movement drafted and has promoted for almost two years was a decisive political victory. 

The party now has a toolkit that removes the litany of excuses that have previously been deployed to explain lack of action against specific instances of antisemitism in its ranks. 

But to be clear, all this does is bring Labour, the party rooted in equality, to the place that it should have already been in. It alone does not repair Labour’s relationship with the Jewish community.  However, if used properly it might enable Labour to show it is serious about regaining that trust.

We set ourselves strong aspirations for this campaign. We didn’t just push for a majority on the National Executive Committee to adopt the proposals. We were clear it needed to be unanimous. It needed to be owned by the entire NEC, covering all groupings within the party. 

We succeeded in this but it was steering the changes though conference that was the biggest challenge. We knew that a small win was the worst possible outcome. It would mean that we had won the vote but lost the argument and lost the politics. This was always as much about political education of members and delegates as about winning the vote. A big win would help push antisemites back out to the fringe. In the end the massive aggregate vote of 96.28 per cent of delegates and affiliates exceeded all expectations.  

This success was achieved against a backdrop of deep-rooted opposition to key features of our proposals. The notions of removing the need to prove motivation (removing the Livingstone-esque “I didn’t mean to be antisemitic” defence) and creating an exception to free speech clauses were particularly difficult for many. Some pressured us to settle for a compromise position. But our target was the "gold standard" on antisemitism that was recommended in the Chakrabarti report. Baroness Chakrabarti herself played a critical role in steering this through. I don’t think it would have happened without her. 

The proof of the pudding, however, will be in the eating. We will be closely monitoring the implementation of these new rules together with the activities of the often-opaque National Constitutional Committee that hears serious disciplinary cases. With matters arising from events at this conference itself, coupled with the prospect of high-profile cases like that of Jackie Walker and the anticipated second Livingstone hearing in the pipeline, it will soon become clear just how much has actually changed.

Jeremy Newmark is National Chair of the Jewish Labour Movement