SCOTTISH Labour leader Richard Leonard yesterday defied members of his own shadow cabinet by declining to back an international code on anti-Semitism in its entirety.
Leonard instead backed the position of UK leader Jeremy Corbyn by supporting “further conversations” with the Jewish community over a row that is tearing Labour apart.
He said the party “may” support the full definition of anti-Semitism provided by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA), but his response fell short of the unequivocal backing offered by five of his shadow cabinet secretaries.
One senior party figure said: “He can’t bring himself to go against Jeremy.”
Labour is in turmoil after its governing national executive committee approved the IHRA’s 40-word definition, but did not endorse all 11 of the associated examples of anti-Semitism. The decision incensed the Jewish community and Labour has promised to consult further.
The row came followed controversies such as Corbyn backing a graffiti artist who produced a mural featuring anti-Semitic tropes, as well as the party dealing with allegations of anti-Jewish sentiment by members.
In Scotland, five of Leonard’s top team – Anas Sarwar, Monica Lennon, Jackie Baillie, Colin Smyth and Daniel Johnson – broke ranks last week by calling on the UK party to adopt the 11 IHRA examples. The move was reported exclusively in last week's Sunday Herald.
Their call put pressure on Leonard, a Corbyn ally who was criticised for saying nothing on the controversy.
In a bruising BBC interview yesterday, Leonard broke his silence by saying that his party was not in a “very good situation” on the anti-Semitism standoff, which has dominated the media in recent weeks.
Asked if he would be willing to recommend the IHRA definition in full, he did not echo the call of his shadow cabinet colleagues:
“I am willing to recommend that we have further discussion and dialogue with the Jewish community, including the Jewish community in Scotland."
Leonard said Labour needed a “robust” code on anti-Semitism, but also a framework which allowed people to speak freely about Palestine and Israel.
Pushed again on the IHRA code, he said: “The way through this may be that we do, in the end, adopt in full all of the working examples outlined in the IHRA code, but I am also determined to make sure that freedom of speech is maintained inside the Labour party too. We need there to be space for a discourse about Palestine and Israel, for example, but it needs to be conducted in such a way that there is no anti-Semitism permeating that debate.”
He added: “It may be, for example, that we agree, in full, the working examples as well as the definition ... but it may be that we also need to look at some kind of rider.”
Meanwhile, it has emerged that one of his senior MSPs helped circulate a “victim-shaming” conspiracy theory during the row over the party’s handling of anti-Semitism allegations.
Claudia Beamish, one of Leonard’s shadow cabinet colleagues, retweeted a statement that the anti-Semitism claims may have been “daily propaganda” ahead of the local elections this year.
The original tweet, posted by the @momentumcv Twitter account in May, stated: “#Antisemitism A regular slot. Anyone noticed that now the elections are over, there is no daily propaganda? How can any Jewish person accept that being done to them and their religion?”
However, a Scottish Labour spokesperson said Beamish believed she had been highlighting a video which showed Corbyn meeting the Jewish community.
"Claudia’s intention was to retweet a video of Jeremy Corbyn meeting Jewish community groups and not this tweet. When she realised she had retweeted the wrong tweet she undid her retweet immediately. It was a genuine mistake,” the spokesperson said.
Tory MP Paul Masterton said the original tweet was “classic victim-shaming” and said it was “concerning” Beamish had retweeted it: “Until the Labour party leadership truly understands the full extent of this problem, there is no chance they will tackle it effectively.”
As well as serving in Leonard’s top team, Beamish is also deputy convener of Holyrood’s cross party group on Palestine.
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