LABOUR has accused the Conservative Government of "playing party politics" with the Skripal poisoning case after a minister made a thinly-veiled suggestion that Jeremy Corbyn could not be trusted with security intelligence.
Noting how the Labour leader had seen more security intelligence "than the average backbench MP" because he had received a Privy Council briefing on the matter, Ben Wallace, the UK Government Security Minister then said: "The circle of who gets to see very sensitive information is very small because if you leak it or it gets out, people's lives are put at risk."
Labour HQ hit out at Mr Wallace’s words, saying: "This is completely irresponsible and another attempt by the Tories to deflect criticism from Boris Johnson's blatant attempt to mislead the public.
"The Foreign Secretary has still failed to account for himself and still has serious questions to answer. Ben Wallace should be acting in the national interest, not playing party politics with the country's security," a spokesman added.
Meanwhile, the SNP's Stewart McDonald hit out at Mr Johnson, claiming on BBC Radio 5 Live that he had a "slippery loose tongued approach" to diplomacy and should face "some kind of sanction, if not be sacked" over his remarks on the Salisbury attack.
The MP for Glasgow South said: “Going too far seems to be the hallmark of how this Foreign Secretary carries out his duties. He's in one of the most sensitive top jobs in government and acts as the UK's top diplomat and having a slippery tongue, as he too often has, is a qualification that really he could do without.”
He said the things Mr Johnson had done in the past deserved his resignation. “Having this kind of slippery loose-tongued approach to what is the most serious of incidents and attack on UK soil, it's just not on. It wouldn't be accepted in any other department of government, so he has to face some form of consequence for it.”
Mr McDonald, who is his party’s defence spokesman, added: “This is the wrong man in the wrong job. He surely, surely has to face some kind of sanction, if not be sacked.”
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