From Warwick Labour to Warwick Left: What the rebrand means for left-wing politics on campus

At the start of the month, Warwick Labour Society – one of the largest and most active Labour student societies in the country – formally disaffiliated from the National Labour Party.

Chaos followed as Warwick Labour and its Chair, Edward Swann, were catapulted into the national media landscape, featuring in newspapers like The New Statesman, and both support and criticism poured in. In the tumultuous aftermath of this decision, Warwick Labour has formally transformed into the ‘Warwick Left Society’, while a new Warwick Labour society has emerged, headed by former exec members. Articles have already been written about the ‘drama’ of the events and rumours of exec-infighting. However, I got the chance to speak with both Ed Swann (Warwick Left Society Chair) and Luke Davies (Warwick Left Society Talks and Events) about the decision and the future of left-wing politics on campus.

Firstly, however, it is important to discuss the historical context that sets Warwick Labour apart from other university societies, which shows that the rebrand does not exist in a vacuum, as some have presented it.

Throughout the 1990s, 2000s, and early 2010s, Warwick Labour trod the party line, with the occasional divergence on evergreen matters like the Israel-Palestine issue

We start our story in the previous century, with the heyday of ‘Red Warwick’. For those unaware, our university campus was once the centre of student socialism in the UK – particularly in the 1970s and 1980s. The NUS’s (National Union of Students) No Platform Policy, for instance, was sparked by the death of Warwick student Kevin Gately during an anti-fascist protest. Nationwide coverage of demonstrations over the right to our own SU building, rent rises, and Thatcherite education costs was regular. It was only natural then that our student societies reflected this. Warwick Socialist Society, Warwick Labour Club, and Warwick Communist Society were all popular and staunchly left-wing. My aunt – a student in the late 1980s – recalls talk of further rent strikes and demonstrations against Tory ministers. Warwick was a university defined by activism, not finance.

As the Cold War ended and Tony Blair emerged, ‘Red Warwick’ slowly lost its hue. Warwick Labour Club, now Warwick Labour Society, changed with New Labour, rather than sticking to its socialist roots. Throughout the 1990s, 2000s, and early 2010s, Warwick Labour trod the party line, with the occasional divergence on evergreen matters like the Israel-Palestine issue.

Our story really begins with the 2015 election of Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the Labour Party. Corbyn’s base, heavily composed of young, more radical members, many of whom were university students, spurred a shift in the Warwick Labour society back to its socialist roots. By 2019, coinciding with the election of the Corbynite Zarah Sultana to Coventry South, Warwick Labour had cemented itself on the left of Labour politics.

With the trend we have established so far, once Jeremy Corbyn was replaced by Keir Starmer, a much more centrist figure, Warwick Labour should have moved to the centre. Yet, they did not. In 2021, Grace Lewis, the now-famous ex-Labour Councillor, was elected Chair of the society, a surefire marker of the society’s political base. Her successors since (Challenger, Chapman, Swann) have all been on the left of the Labour Party, and the society has been vocal on left-wing issues like Gaza and a steadfast supporter of left-wing politicians like Sultana. Thus, by August 2025, we arrive at a position where the Warwick Labour Society is already in contention with the centrist national Labour Party.

Many questions remain over the decision to disaffiliate, but what this brief history lesson has shown is that Warwick Labour was already a Labour society in impaired communion with the national party

On 8 July, Warwick Labour released a statement of glowing support for Zarah Sultana over her decision to leave the Labour Party. The following month, on 1 August, Warwick Labour reposted now-Councillor Grace Lewis’s similar decision to leave the Labour Party. This was followed shortly after by a statement from Swann in which he outlined both his intentions to leave the party and the decision to disaffiliate Warwick Labour from it. Thus, almost out of the blue, Warwick Labour Society became the ‘Warwick Labour Movement’, before ultimately renaming themselves the ‘Warwick Left Society’, following an EGM (Extraordinary General Meeting) on 21 August,

Many questions remain over the decision to disaffiliate, but what this brief history lesson has shown is that Warwick Labour was already a Labour society in impaired communion with the national party. As Ed Swann and Luke Davies argue, the decision to leave does seem perhaps “inevitable”.

Will: Firstly, the decision to rebrand. Why now?

Ed: There was always a feeling that something was happening within the Labour Party. Every year, less and less of our members are actual members of the Labour Party. I think there’s always been something building up towards us breaking away.

Will: Luke, do you feel the same?

Luke: Yeah, the society was moving in this direction anyway. It might have taken longer, but I feel like the outcome would have happened regardless.

Will: What happened specifically that made you want to rebrand?

Ed: The real turning point was when Zarah [Sultana] left the party and announced a new party, and then the moment where I was like, “Okay, we’re actually doing this”, was the opportunity to coincide with Grace’s [Lewis, Councillor] resignation.

Will: In your statement, you admitted to mistakes you’ve made. What were they?

I formally apologised to the exec in our next meeting. Since then, everything has been discussed, and we had an EGM where members voted on the direction of the society. When the new party properly launches, we’ll have another vote. It’s not about me

Ed Swann, Warwick Left Society Chair

Ed: The biggest mistake was deciding to collaborate with Grace on her resignation post without consulting the rest of the exec. It kicked off the process of our rebrand much earlier than I wanted to.

Will: Luke, how aware were you and the rest of the exec on the decision to rebrand?

Luke: There was very little communication about the initial decision to support Grace Lewis, but afterwards, we had several discussions where every exec member had the opportunity to express their views. It wasn’t some big conspiracy.

Will: How are you going to ensure democracy going forward?

Ed: Firstly, I formally apologised to the exec in our next meeting. Since then, everything has been discussed, and we had an EGM where members voted on the direction of the society. When the new party properly launches, we’ll have another vote. It’s not about me.

NB: Outcomes of the EGM included:

• Society to be renamed Warwick Left Society.
• All Labour references removed from the constitution.
• Proposals to affiliate with the new Your Party were rejected.

We really want to avoid being viewed as this cult of personality with Zarah – and now Grace. But that’s something very difficult to avoid. As a society that has values of socialism, it’s very easy for us to get involved with the work she does in the local area

Ed Swann, Chair of Warwick Left

Will: A lot of people have commented on the Grace / Zarah connection. How do you respond to those who would argue there is too much emphasis on these two – and Coventry – over the broader movement?

Ed: We really want to avoid being viewed as this cult of personality with Zarah – and now Grace. But that’s something very difficult to avoid. As a society that has values of socialism, it’s very easy for us to get involved with the work she does in the local area. We’re not here to just debate and talk about things like other societies.

Will: Let’s move to campus. There are now a lot of left-wing societies on campus. Is this not confusing for freshers? Where do Labour Party members go?

Ed: I could see how that might be confusing, but Warwick Left is open to anyone – whether you’re in the Labour party, not in the party, Green, whatever. I don’t see a reason why someone couldn’t be in both the Labour Society and Warwick Left.

Will: What does Warwick Left actually stand for without Labour?

Ed: Our principles are basically the same as before. We are still socialist, still about liberation, equality, climate justice, racial justice, etc. Warwick Labour was already very left-wing; the rebrand hasn’t changed that. Our principles haven’t shifted; we’ve just cut the baggage.

Will: Luke, as Talks and Events officer, how are things going to change?

Luke: There will be a lot more freedom to bring in speakers without worrying about repercussions, although it might be a challenge to convince Labour members to come.

The genocide against Palestinians was a turning point for a lot of us. Seeing the party’s complicity – the way it refused to call out genocide – broke something for me

Ed Swann, Chair of Warwick Left

Will: Will you not lose influence on campus without the name recognition of Labour?

Ed: Honestly, no. Labour societies are dwindling across the country. I don’t think people now view Labour societies as a political tool to actually achieve anything. I also think I’ve spent so much time trying to justify why we are the Labour society, and people are only going to be happy with the fact that we are no longer affiliated.

Will: Warwick Labour has been outspoken on Palestine. Has what’s happened there influenced the decision to rebrand?

Ed: Massively. The genocide against Palestinians was a turning point for a lot of us. Seeing the party’s complicity – the way it refused to call out genocide – broke something for me. As Warwick Left, we can say those things without worrying about getting kicked out of the Labour Party. Our commitment to Palestine is literally written into our constitution now.

Will: You want this new society to be impactful. How are you planning on doing this without a link to the governing party?

Ed: Internal party democracy in the Labour Party is dire. Anyone who doesn’t agree with the faction in the Party that controls Labour gets completely shut out. We already didn’t have a voice at all, and now we’re free to support the policies we actually believe in.

Will: Luke, are you open to collaborating with the new Warwick Labour Society on talks and events?

Luke: Yeah, I would be, if they’re willing. I would not be opposed. I intend to host events with the Greens, with climate justice, and other societies in the Left Network, but yes, Labour as well.

There were no hostile exchanges of messages. When they resigned, I had a 20-minute phone call with them, and then they resigned very nicely, very amicably

Ed Swann, Chair of Warwick Left

Will: Finally, for both of you, the recent Boar article alluded to disputes and disagreements with former exec members who now run the New Warwick Labour society. Any comments?

Ed: No comment on the article, but there were no hostile exchanges of messages. When they resigned, I had a 20-minute phone call with them, and then they resigned very nicely, very amicably.

So, what should we take from this interview, and the decision more broadly, what’s next for Warwick Left? Firstly, and as he himself recognises, Swann made a mistake in how he delivered the decision. By announcing it in such a sudden and poorly communicated way, Swann put the exec on the back foot. Yet, the choice itself is the right one for the society. As someone who has been to several Labour events as an observer, this is not the sensationalised crisis in which a small clique moved the whole society to their whim. The society and its members are clearly on the left of the Labour Party, and this is a natural conclusion of this path.

It is also worth noting that Warwick Left is not operating in isolation. Across the country, in Newcastle, Manchester, and Bath, Labour societies are disaffiliating from the national party. If Warwick Labour members were concerned about impact, they need look no further than these subsequent disaffiliations.

That said, I hope Swann and the society take more time to consider the role of Zarah Sultana and Grace Lewis – two individuals whose influence over the society is only going to deepen. Whether that is a good thing depends on your perspective, but Swann is overly optimistic in his belief that the society can freely choose who it supports without a reciprocal give-and-take. We have already seen how Grace Lewis has used her connections to influence a society to which she is no longer an elected member. Moreover, it’s not fanciful to foresee similar challenges for Warwick Left over its associations with Lewis, Sultana, and, by extension, Corbyn – issues that Warwick Labour previously faced due to its links with the national party.

Finally, I feel a pang of sympathy for those freshers joining next month as Labour members, hoping to make an impact through the official society. For them, the reality is that the society that bears the Labour name is no longer the large and active vehicle for change it was in years prior. Students who want to engage meaningfully will need to navigate a far more fragmented and personality-driven landscape than they might have hoped.

In the end, Warwick Left is the same society as it was two months ago. It is still fighting for a more left-wing, activist, and socially just campus and local area. It may have lost some familiarity and deepened some shadowy influences, but it has gained clarity and freedom from a Labour Party that is too centrist for student politics.