Tom Watson and Keith Vaz have said that Shami Chakrabarty has impeccable qualifications to sit in the House of Lords as a Labour peer. But, a number of members of the PLP have called into question the report that Shami conducted into alleged ant-semitism within the party, on the basis of the peerage Jeremy Corbyn has put her forward for! Surely someone who might provide a whitewash of a report, on the basis of being offered a peerage, could hardly be someone who has impeccable qualifications could they?
Once again we seem to have a situation where careerist Labour MP's, who have grown used to treating politics as nothing more than a game, whereby they seize on any immediate opportunity to score points against an opponent, whatever the long-term consequence might be, have shown that they shoot from the hip without concern for the collateral damage they cause.
All those members of the PLP who have rushed to their friends in the Tory media, seeing an opportunity to score points against Jeremy over this issue should stop their weasel words, and tell us exactly what they are saying. Are they saying that Jeremy offered a peerage to Shami in return for carrying out a report that was a whitewash in relation to antisemitism in the party? Are they saying that Shami was prepared to be bribed by accepting such an offer of a peerage in order to undertake such a whitewash? If not what exactly are they complaining about?
No comments:
Post a Comment