Labour anti-semitism row masks very different battle

LABOUR’S divisions appeared to fade away after the 2017 general election – but now they’re out in the open for all to see.

Len McCluskey, the general secretary of union Unite and a firm supporter of Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, is particularly keen for the world to know what an unhappy family Labour has become.

The targets of his anger include Black Country MP Ian Austin, the MP for Dudley North.

In an article for the left-wing New Statesman magazine, McCluskey wrote: “MPs such as Chris Leslie, Neil Coyle (my own MP), John Woodcock, Wes Streeting, Ian Austin, and others, have become a dismal chorus whose every dirge makes winning a Labour government more difficult.”

If you don’t recognise the names it probably won’t come as a surprise to learn that they are all Labour MPs.

McCluskey’s complaint is that Labour MPs have been raising the issue of anti-semitism within the party.

This is a slightly odd argument, as Corbyn himself has admitted that Labour does have a problem with anti-semitism, and says he is determined to deal with the problem.

The Labour leadership says it supports MPs who have spoken out against anti-semitism, and insists those who raise the issue are not indulging in “smears” but are highlighting a real problem. McCluskey’s position is nuanced. He states in the New Statesman: “I accept there are anti-Semites in the Labour Party – few in number for sure, but any is too much – and that raising the issue of combating their views is not merely legitimate, but essential.”

But he then goes on to attack MPs who have said the same thing.

He says: “This issue has joined a line of others in being used by a group of backbench Labour MPs to attack and undermine Jeremy Corbyn and the progressive leadership of the party.”

And McCluskey adds: “Just as it is legitimate to raise and combat anti-semitic views, it is also legitimate to contextualise the attacks of right-wing MPs without being accused of minimalising or denying anti-semitism.”

It’s hard to make sense of this. It sounds a little as if McCluskey believes Labour MPs are not sincere in claiming they want to fight anti-Jewish racism, but are only pretending to care about the issue in order to use it as a stick to beat Corbyn with.

But he then goes on to say: “I do not doubt they are sincere in their opposition to anti-semitism, but they need to understand that if you attack your party leader about everything, it devalues your criticisms concerning anything in particular.”

If they’re actually sincere in their opposition to anti-semitism – and if anti-semitism is a real problem which must be fought, as McCluskey says – then what are the MPs doing wrong?

McCluskey goes on to claim the MPs “work overtime trying to present the Labour Party as a morass of misogyny, anti-Semitism and bullying” before adding: “Of course, they have a right to express their own views.”

Is McCluskey attempting to help Corbyn? Perhaps, but there is an alternative explanation.

He is awaiting the outcome of a legal challenge by Gerard Coyne, the former West Midlands organiser for Unite, who stood against Mr McCluskey in a contest for the Unite leadership.

Coyne lost the election last year, with 53,544 votes to Mr McCluskey’s 59,067.

It was a bad-tempered fight. McCluskey accused Black Country MP Tom Watson, Labour’s Deputy Leader, and Sion Simon, Labour’s candidate to be West Midlands mayor, of conspiring against him.

Coyne was sacked from his union role two months after the result was announced. But the battle may not be over. Judge Jeffrey Burke QC is currently

Corbyn himself has admitted that Labour does have a problem with anti-semitism

considering a legal challenge against the election’s outcome.

Coyne claimed that his opponent had an unfair advantaged because he continued to do the job of General Secretary despite announcing he’d step down.

If the judge finds in Coyne’s favour, he has the power to order a new election.

And Coyne has other complaints, including a claim that Unite officials campaigned openly for McCluskey in what he says was a clear breach of the rules.

These are scheduled to be considered at the end of June. It means that there could be another election to see who leads Unite.

And McCluskey may well feel that demonstrating his unwavering devotion to Corbyn will help him win any fresh ballot of Unite members.