The Guardian view on Labour and antisemitism: a question of leadership | Editorial

After the party’s ‘day of shame’ the suspension of Jeremy Corbyn risks turning the opposition inward at a crucial time for British politics

Labour has been braced for months for the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s report on antisemitism during Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership. The release of the report on Thursday was generally expected to mark what Keir Starmer duly called it, a “day of shame” for the party, in which Labour took its punishment, confessed its sins and apologised to Britain’s Jewish population. Few expected events to take the dramatic course they then did, with Mr Corbyn’s unwillingness to apologise and his subsequent suspension from the party he recently led threatening to eclipse the larger issue.

The report’s findings are nevertheless clear and stark. Labour, it says, was responsible for unlawful and antisemitic acts of harassment and discrimination. There were multiple failures in the party’s system for handling antisemitism complaints, including inconsistent approaches, poor training and lack of transparency. There was also, more broadly, a Labour culture that “at best, did not do enough to prevent antisemitism and, at worst, could be seen to accept it”. The report concludes that antisemitism within Labour could have been tackled more effectively if the party leadership had chosen to do so.

These are devastating findings, not just against Mr Corbyn but against any party, especially one that prides itself on its commitment to equality and which set up the very commission that conducted the investigation. Mr Starmer takes this view. He is understandably determined to draw a line. He has already authorised private settlements in the civil cases brought by former party members and staff. On Thursday he announced that the party would plead guilty to the report on all counts. Labour accepted the findings in full and said it would implement all its recommendations. There will be an action plan, a new independent complaints process and zero tolerance of antisemitism.

It was a steely response, forcefully delivered. But it was not simply a plea to begin a clean page with Jewish voters and former Labour members and MPs, important though that was. It was also an implicit attack on his predecessor and supporters. In a key passage, Mr Starmer added that those who reject the report’s findings, or who think the issue is exaggerated or a factional attack were “part of the problem too”. They too “should be nowhere near the Labour party either”. This was tough language. Mr Corbyn however insisted that the issue had been “dramatically overstated for political reasons”. When Mr Corbyn refused to retract, Mr Starmer suspended him and withdrew the party whip, pending an investigation.

It is a huge move for Labour. It shows Mr Starmer’s willingness to take a tough decision, his calculation that most of the party will back him, especially on this issue, and his preparedness to start to chart a very different course for the Labour party. But it also shows Mr Corbyn’s determination to defend his legacy and to defy Mr Starmer to force him out. Whatever the eventual consequences of the now inevitable battle, it means that Labour risks turning inward at exactly the moment it should be leading the charge against Boris Johnson over Covid and hard Brexit.

Contributor

Editorial

The GuardianTramp

Related Content

Article image
The Guardian view on Labour’s leadership race: a long road back | Editorial
Editorial: After a catastrophic election, the party’s contest to replace Jeremy Corbyn must be conducted in a spirit of honesty and humility

Editorial

06, Jan, 2020 @6:36 PM

Article image
The Guardian view on Labour and antisemitism: a leader must lead | Editorial
Editorial: Jeremy Corbyn does not lead an anstisemitic party. But he is too complacent and reactive to a vile issue that threatens his moral authority

Editorial

26, Mar, 2018 @5:32 PM

Article image
The Guardian view on antisemitism and Labour: not just a problem of perception | Editorial
Editorial: The Labour party is tackling difficult questions of how to defend free speech while curbing antisemitic hate-speech. But it hasn’t come up with an acceptable answer

Editorial

24, Jul, 2018 @5:42 PM

Article image
The Guardian view on the Labour leadership: a deep and wide debate | Editorial
Editorial: Lisa Nandy is almost certain to be on the ballot for members to choose the next Labour leader. She offers a change not just of speed, but of direction for the party

Editorial

21, Jan, 2020 @6:29 PM

Article image
The Guardian view on antisemitism and Labour: a shadow over the body politic | Editorial
Editorial: Jeremy Corbyn must tackle racism to make good on his promise to unify the country

Editorial

26, Nov, 2019 @6:59 PM

Article image
The Guardian view on Starmer’s Labour: time to take on the Tories | Editorial
Editorial: The Labour leader must know his party faces existential implications if it suffers a historic fifth election defeat

Editorial

26, Sep, 2021 @4:53 PM

Article image
Antisemitism, Corbyn and the Labour whip | Letters
Letters: Prof Peter Womack is dismayed by the terms of the current discussion, Tim Bailey says Corbyn needs to give a clearcut apology, while Matthew Robb argues that if Starmer disagrees with the disciplinary panel he needs to appeal against its decision, not unilaterally impose extra punishments

Letters

20, Nov, 2020 @6:31 PM

Article image
Labour leadership rivals back '10 pledges' to tackle antisemitism
Contenders voice support for recommendations from Board of Deputies of British Jews

Kate Proctor

12, Jan, 2020 @7:21 PM

Article image
The Guardian view on the Labour split: a mistake but also a warning | Editorial
Editorial: The party has always been a broad church, and it must remain one if it is to form an effective opposition and government

Editorial

18, Feb, 2019 @3:14 PM

Article image
The Guardian view on Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour: it should be a broad church | Editorial
Editorial: The Labour leader ought to be true to his ideological roots and must not attempt to force members to back his Brexit policy on the back of trade union votes

Editorial

22, Sep, 2019 @6:00 PM