Jeremy corbyn

Since Jeremy Corbyn was elected as Labour leader, his close friend – and rumoured former lover — Diane Abbott has proved to be one of his most loyal allies. When Abbott — who has earned the nickname Madame Mao — isn’t spending PLP meetings writing her Christmas cards, the Shadow International Development Secretary can be found defending Corbyn from accusations of sexism, as well as appearing on television to praise the new regime. Still, with rumours circulating that Abbott is being given the cold shoulder by some members of Team Corbyn after a rather disastrous turn on Today, could it be that she is planning to change the way she deals with the media?

When Jeremy Corbyn says it is better to bring people to trial than to shoot them, he is right. So one might feel a little sorry for him as the critics attack his reaction to the Paris events. But in fact the critics are correct, for the wrong reason. It is not Mr Corbyn’s concern for restraint and due process which are the problem. It is the question of where his sympathies really lie, of what story he thinks all these things tell. Every single time that a terrorist act is committed (unless, of course, it be a right-wing one, like that of Anders Breivik), Mr Corbyn locates the ill

Jezza started PMQs with a bit of a wobble. As he got to his feet the applause from his Labour ‘friends’ sounded like the hoarse whooshings of a punctured beach ball. Corbyn nervously offered his sympathy to the Paris terror victims and expressed concern that the slaughter of 129 innocents might increase Islamophobia in Britain. The attacks, he said, ‘have nothing in common with the 2 million Muslims who live here.’ David Cameron agreed, partially. He drew a distinction between ‘the religion of peace’ (which is Islam, in case you were getting confused) and the ‘bile spouted’ by terrorist killers. But, he said, ‘it’s not good enough to say there’s no

There is nothing wrong with Jeremy Corbyn saying he ‘isn’t happy’ with a shoot-to-kill policy. On the contrary, it shows once again that he is a man of principle. We may not agree with, or like, his principles — but can we at least recognise that, unlike his opponents, he is not bending to the national mood? He is not willing to ditch his integrity in order to ease the public’s fear and sate our lust for a violent response to terror. For Corbyn’s haters on the Labour right, his position proves once again that he is not a ‘serious’ person. For one of his shadow cabinet, his position even makes

Jeremy Corbyn addressed the Parliamentary Labour Party this evening and it appears to have been a difficult meeting — depending on who you listen to. Those inside the room have said Corbyn was ‘shouted down’ by MPs for his stance on military action and Syria, while others say he was ‘savaged’ over his shoot to kill remarks. After the meeting, Corbyn’s spokesman denied these meetings are getting worse and worse for the leader and said the majority of comments from MPs were not critical: ‘There is a small minority that is taking that view at successive PLP meetings but I think actually you’ll find when it comes to it, there is quite a strong

On Wednesday night, Jeremy Corbyn brought to an end one of the most undignified sagas in recent politics, cobbling together a shuffled compromise on his induction into the Privy Council. The Privy Council, as we’ve been told so often now, is the body of senior politicians that is allowed to receive security briefings. Membership would have required Corbyn – the life-long republican –  to vow ‘not to know or understand of any manner of thing to be attempted, done, or spoken against Her Majesty’s person, honour, crown, or dignity royal’. Did he kneel, bob, or grab the royal paw in an firm egalitarian handshake? Does it matter? Meanwhile, America’s college campuses remain