A member of Jeremy Corbyn’s frontbench team has backed the Government over its mass expulsion of Russian diplomats, saying it would have been “easier for us” if the Labour leader made it clear he supported the move too.
Mr Corbyn received fierce criticism from Conservatives and some of his own MPs after his team raised doubts about who was responsible for the Salisbury nerve agent attack.
A group of Labour backbenchers said it “unequivocally accepts” the Russian state’s culpability for the incident, while Theresa May said it was “outrageous” that Mr Corbyn’s spokesman had said there was a “problematic” history over the use of UK intelligence.
Shadow defence secretary Nia Griffith said that it was “quite clear” that, due to the nature of the chemical weapon used, it had been an “act of aggression”.
“And that is why we are fully supporting the expulsion of 23 diplomats,” she told the Daily Mirror.
Ms Griffith said senior Labour figures had been briefed by security services over the attack on Sunday March 4 that left Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia fighting for their lives.
Asked if Mr Corbyn had undermined UK security assessments that it was “highly likely” Russia was behind their poisoning, Ms Griffith said: “Looking back, perhaps it would have been easier for us if he had made it clear at the beginning of what he said, just how much we support the expulsion of the diplomats.
“It would have been easier and perhaps we would not have had the conversations we are seeing.”
Ms Griffith’s comments were quickly supported by several Labour MPs.
Exeter MP Ben Bradshaw said she was “spot on”, while Kingston Upon Hull North MP Diana Johnson said she “fully” supported the shadow defence secretary.
The Sun, meanwhile, reported that shadow foreign secretary Emily Thornberry told a London seminar: “We utterly condemn this despicable act and support all the measures taken by the Government today.”
Mr Corbyn’s spokesman’s comments prompted Labour backbencher John Woodcock to table an Early Day Motion “unequivocally” accepting the “Russian state’s culpability” for the attack, and supporting “fully” the statement made by Mrs May in the Commons.
The motion was swiftly signed by a number of prominent critics of Mr Corbyn, some of whom went public with their criticism of the leader’s senior aide Seumas Milne.
Labour MP Anna Turley tweeted: “I’m afraid Seumas doesn’t speak for my Labour or British values”, while Chuka Umunna said: “Mr Milne’s comments do not represent the views of the majority of our voters, members or MPs.”
The Labour spokesman said the Government may have more information.
He told reporters: “The Government has access to information and intelligence on this matter which others don’t.
“However, also there is a history in relation to weapons of mass destruction and intelligence which is problematic, to put it mildly.
“So, I think the right approach is to seek the evidence to follow international treaties, particularly in relation to prohibitive chemical weapons.”
Asked if he could rule out the possibility of Russia being framed, the spokesman said the evidence pointed “overwhelmingly” to the two options set out by the PM.
“In the meantime I think it is essential we follow the evidence and what the evidence produces,” he added.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel