Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has distanced herself from a widely condemned tweet by one of her top team describing Keir Starmer as a “Quisling”.
Shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick has faced criticism for using the phrase, a term for someone who collaborates with an occupying force in their own country, in a row over the Chagos Islands.
Ms Badenoch’s official spokesman effectively disowned the comment, saying she was “not responsible” for Mr Jenrick’s tweets.
But he added that the Tory leader considered Mr Jenrick a “valued member of the shadow cabinet”, saying “she is not someone who polices tweets”.
Vidkun Quisling was a Norwegian politician and Nazi collaborator who led the puppet government of Norway during World War II.
Mr Jenrick was condemned for his comments by Brendan Cox, the husband of the murdered MP Jo Cox, who said: “Calling fellow MPs ‘quislings’ and ‘traitors’ isn’t just a pathetic, and painfully inauthentic, attempt to sound populist - it’s also dangerous.
“MPs know they are all at risk from violence, threats and even murder - yet Jenrick uses language that he knows will increase that threat.”
The row centres on the government’s plan to hand the Chagos Islands over to Mauritius.
Mr Jenrick’s intervention came after reports the UK could end up paying £18 billion instead of the original £9 billion under the original agreement to lease back Diego Garcia for 99 years.
Unlike the original deal, which new Mauritian PM Navin Ramgoolam said was “not good enough”, there would also be no automatic extension mechanism after 99 years.
Shadow home secretary Priti Patel also hit out at the deal.
She said: “It absolutely looks like a betrayal of the British people, a betrayal of our territory.”
Ms Patel said: “We should go back to base camp, look at the judgment and say there are other ways of doing this without just handing over a sovereign territory, and certainly without committing anything from £9 billion to £18 billion at a time when we constantly hear from the government there is a financial crisis here.”
Sir Keir has defended the deal, saying: “This is a military base that is vital to our national security and international security. A number of years ago, the legal certainty of that base was thrown into doubt.
“Without legal certainty, the base cannot operate in practical terms as it should, that is bad for our national security, and it is a gift to our adversaries.”
