“Rather than confront the paramount need to deal with the profoundly serious issue of antisemitism in the [Labour] party, both factions treated it as a factional weapon.” So wrote Martin Forde KC in his landmark 2022 report into allegations of bullying, racism and sexism made during the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn. Nothing seems to have changed, according to the barrister. He thought Labour had acted in a “shambolic” manner in first backing and then dropping its Rochdale byelection candidate over his objectionable views. Labour had not acted on his report’s recommendation that disciplinary matters be handled in a “neutral and objective way”.
Sir Keir Starmer’s party had initially taken no action against its Blairite Muslim candidate Azhar Ali, who had espoused an antisemitic conspiracy theory during a meeting of the Lancashire Labour party. This despite his offence being more egregious than those committed by MPs on the left who had been swiftly suspended. Given that parliamentarians have been waiting months for decisions, Sir Keir’s uneven response invited cynicism and scorn. That explains why another (anti-Corbynite) Labour parliamentary candidate in Lancashire was swiftly suspended on Tuesday night over comments made about Israel.
Mr Ali had apologised for saying Israel “allowed” Hamas’s 7 October massacre to take place. This error of judgment should have been picked up before Mr Ali was selected. That it was not is revealing about the fractious state of today’s Labour party in which Sir Keir’s defence of Israeli actions that appeared to be war crimes and an apparent unwillingness to stand up for Palestinian human rights have caused widespread disquiet. Mr Ali’s position became untenable after a recording surfaced that suggested his earlier utterance was not a one-off mistake. Perhaps Labour saw Mr Ali as the best hope of defeating the demagogic George Galloway. Since 2005, the ex-Labour politician has twice defeated his old party by tapping into discontent among Muslim voters, who make up a third of Rochdale’s electorate.
Mr Ali may still win as his name cannot be removed from the ballot paper. That would present Labour with a dilemma, as failure to restore the whip might alienate voters who backed Mr Ali despite his views. Sir Keir has promoted the idea that he was an unequivocal friend of Israel, partly to distance himself from Mr Corbyn. The competitive internal battle between factions is not intrinsically destructive. It can produce new ideas that regenerate the party as times have changed.
Sir Keir’s admiration of Harold Wilson, a staunch defender of Israel, might explain his actions. Angered in 1973 during the Yom Kippur war by the Heath government’s decision to impose an arms embargo on both sides in the hope of appeasing the oil-producing Arab states, the Labour leader overrode shadow cabinet dissent to impose a three-line whip on Labour MPs. He lost the vote but went on to win the election. Today’s conflict in the Middle East, however, is an even more neuralgic subject in Labour. In 2019, nearly 80% of Muslims voted Labour. In 2010, only 37% did. Sir Keir may think his polling lead is large enough to take a hit. But his colleagues do not: Scottish Labour and Labour frontbenchers are backing an immediate ceasefire – wary of the Scottish National party’s plans for a vote on Gaza next week, just days before the Rochdale byelection. Sir Keir’s determination to escape from his predecessor’s shadow is not a bad idea. But not its pursuit at all costs.
