Despite those arguments being very much open and a part of national news from day one. His view that it lacks openness seems based on some new fangled view of open no one else follows.

And your only evidence being one independent MP who is no more than an active member of the party. That clearly disagreed with the remaining sources standing with the party. And decided leaving was his only way to effect a losing argument.

The more logical conclusion is Adnan Hussain was unwilling to work with the rest of the party.

Yes, it's one argument the leaders of both sides of the debate worked together. And one member that happened to be an MP and have no leadership role in the party ( as no one currently does. Even Corbyn is no more than an acting figurehead for the electoral commission rules until after conference). Left after the debate was settled by other active members.

As I keep saying. The media view of YP is totally false and ignores every other party, having much worse arguments all the time. Anyone who wants to can look into the causes and arguments of the debate. It really takes no effort to see it is to be expected given the current stage and risk involved in setting up any party from an idealistic movement. And no different to the history of every other party in the UK.

Dose the party have a few issues. Of course, it's 2 Months old and attempting a first time set up of a very complex structure. But to claim it is failing is totally failinbg to look at any of the internals or plans of the party. Because even with such debates. Everything promissed is happening on schedule. And the actors involved are in no way managing or in most cases even trying to take control while the membership is built.