Labour’s now notorious shadow cabinet meeting on Syria started with Jeremy Corbyn briefly reading from a piece of paper. More than once the Labour leader was asked to speak up by those sitting round the long wooden table.
According to one source, he said little thereafter during a 90-minute discussion about UK foreign and national security policy. His relative silence, and reluctance to hold confrontational arguments, reflect his consensual personality and are a tribute to his collective style of leadership, say his allies.
To others, it is a cause of intense frustration. One shadow cabinet member complains: “He had no ability to chair the meeting, shape a discussion, sum up a debate or anything. He cannot propose or defend an argument forensically. He never really expresses his views in the shadow cabinet. In meetings outside shadow cabinet, he largely leaves it to his advisers.”
These criticisms are from a shadow cabinet member who has no plan to resign – “what on earth would be the point of that?” – and who, like the shadow foreign secretary, Hilary Benn, does not object to Corbyn issuing a surprise letter to the party saying he is determined to oppose airstrikes. This source argues: “He is the leader of the party. If anything I wish he would express his views more.”
Equally, Corbyn’s supporters argue it is perfectly justifiable for the leader to set out his view, and for him to try to rally support this weekend among MPs and constituency parties before next week’s critical meetings of the shadow cabinet and Labour MPs.
Corbyn believes he has more support in the parliamentary party than in the shadow cabinet, and one poll, conducted by YouGov, suggests a majority of party members do oppose airstrikes, even if Labour voters take a different view. That constituency majority view, if it exists, now intends to makes its views known this weekend at rallies, party events and in social media.
No comments:
Post a Comment