MEMBERS of Jeremy Corbyn’s Shadow Cabinet have come out in "full support" of Theresa May's actions against Russia and directly blamed Moscow for the Salisbury chemical attack, a move the Labour leader has refused to do.
Mr Corbyn and his office caused a furious row following the party leader’s response to the Prime Minister’s Commons statement and his chief spokesman’s suggestion there was a “problematic” history over the use of British intelligence.
Nia Griffith, the Shadow Defence Secretary, made clear she backed Mrs May’s approach.
She told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: "We very much accept what the Prime Minister said, this is a very sophisticated nerve agent and that Russia is responsible for this attack.
"Therefore, we are fully supporting the measures which the Government is taking, including the expulsion of the 23 diplomats."
Ms Griffith said she was more "plain speaking" than her party leader and said he had made it clear in "the subsequent statement that he's put out" that Labour was "fully supportive" of the Government's actions.
“The important thing is that is our position now," she stressed.
The Shadow Secretary of State also appeared to distance herself from comments about the "problematic" history of the use of UK intelligence made by Mr Corbyn's spokesman in a briefing on Wednesday.
Some Labour MPs went public with their criticism of the leader's senior aide, Seumas Milne.
Ms Griffith said Britain had "very, very fine intelligence services" and "great expertise on some of these matters".
She told the programme: "I wasn't there and I can't speak for Seumas Milne, the spokesperson, he has to speak for himself."
Meanwhile, Emily Thornberry, the Shadow Foreign Secretary, has also reportedly come out in full support of the PM’s actions. She told a London seminar: "We utterly condemn this despicable act and support all the measures taken by the Government today."
Yet her colleague Diane Abbott, suggested media reports of Mr Corbyn's comments on the Salisbury incident were at odds with what he said in Parliament.
Referring to the appearance of Nick Thomas-Symonds, the Shadow Security Minister, on BBC Two's Newsnight, she tweeted: "So @NickTorfaenMP sets out what @jeremycorbyn ACTUALLY said in Parliament about Russian spy poisoning, as opposed to what media is claiming he said #SalisburyChemicalAttack".
The comments made by Mr Corbyn's spokesman prompted Labour backbencher John Woodcock to table a parliamentary 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.
Labour MP Anna Turley tweeted: "I'm afraid Seumas doesn't speak for my Labour or British values", while Chuka Umunna, the former Shadow Business Secretary, said: "Mr Milne's comments do not represent the views of the majority of our voters, members or MPs."
Mr Corbyn’s spokesman pointed out that while the Labour leader had had a security briefing the Government had “access to information and intelligence on this matter which others don't”.
He went on: "However, also there is a history in relation to weapons of mass destruction and intelligence which is problematic, to put it mildly. So, the right approach is to seek the evidence to follow international treaties, particularly in relation to prohibitive chemical weapons."
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