The shadow foreign secretary showed yesterday what an effective, coherent opposition should look like
I have been a member of the Labour Party for fifteen years and never have I witnessed anything like yesterday.
MPs had a grave decision to make – to support military action against ISIL in Syria or not.
The debate started on a poor note. The prime minister failed to give a clear explanation of his figure that 70,000 moderate Syrians were ready to provide the boots on the ground needed to back up air strikes.
His decision not to apologise for his remarks that those opposed to military action were somehow ‘terrorist sympathisers’ was also an error of judgement that diminished the standing of the office that David Cameron holds.
Then came Jeremy Corbyn – head down in his notes, he simply faced a barrage of noise from the Conservative MPs, failing to answer head on his views about the air strikes currently taking place in Iraq against ISIL, strikes undertaken at the invitation of the Iraqi government itself.
The new, honest politics obviously did not extend to answering a straight question with a straight answer. The sight of deputy leader Tom Watson with his head in his hands said it all.
But then came Hilary Benn. Since agreeing to serve under Jeremy Corbyn Benn has been placed in a difficult, if not impossible position. He was forced to clear up the mess created by Corbyn’s failure to provide leadership on the UK’s place in the EU, and over Syria he has been propelled to play the statesman role that the leader of the official opposition is incapable of doing.
Benn’s speech last night was well and truly electrifying. The passion, the energy and the clarity that he brought to the argument was the kind of speech that neither Cameron nor Corbyn could deliver. It was a speech of a prime minister in waiting.
Jeremy Corbyn sat stony faced throughout, not even able to muster a ‘well done’ on the delivery of a great speech to his shadow foreign secretary.
The Labour Party now faces a crunch moment that it has to confront head on. Yes, Labour members voted overwhelming for Jeremy Corbyn to lead the party but sometimes reality has to hit us.
Jeremy Corbyn is not a prime minister in waiting. His poll ratings are tanking further (if that were possible) among those voters who ultimately decide who governs the country.
His inability to present a united front on crucial security issues would pose severe difficulties of the UK’s position in the world if he were, by some fluke, ever to make it to Downing Street.
But worst of all has been his attitude to his parliamentary colleagues. Yes, he called for an atmosphere of tolerance as MP after MP has faced abuse for supporting military intervention in Syria, but it was he that sent Labour MPs to face the wolves last weekend, leaving them to stew. It was shameful.
Members of the parliamentary Labour Party and the country as a whole know the truth. For all his admirable qualities and principles, Jeremy Corbyn cannot and will not win a General Election. Hilary Benn showed yesterday what an effective, coherent opposition should look like.
Air strikes over Syria are now being undertaken in defence of democracy. In the UK our democracy is in peril thanks to the absence of a credible opposition to hold the government to account.
The Labour Party cannot go on like this. Something, and more specifically someone, needs to change and change now.
Ed Jacobs is a contributing editor at Left Foot Forward. Follow him on Twitter
Left Foot Forward doesn't have the backing of big business or billionaires. We rely on the kind and generous support of ordinary people like you.
You can support hard-hitting journalism that holds the right to account, provides a forum for debate among progressives, and covers the stories the rest of the media ignore. Donate today.
127 Responses to “Comment: Hilary Benn showed us what Labour is missing”
bluecatbabe
It was a well-delivered speech, though his historical analogies were questionable and his conclusions regrettable. What it was not was opposition – it was in agreement with the government, so it did in no way oppose them. But Labour, uniquely, offered a free vote to its MPs, and Benn was exercising his freedom to be sincerely in the wrong. A vote on war is rightly a vote on conscience, and I’m glad to belong to a party which allowed it.
If you really want to change leaders, Ed Jacobs, you are welcome to try: there’s a democratic process for it, if you can get yourself a candidate with a mandate. If the U-turns Labour has achieved so far on Tory policies (Saudi prisons and torture sales, Tax-credit cuts, the Junior doctors imposed contract) and the increased and revitalised membership mean less to you than… um… the right to bomb ISIL with no exit strategy or credible endgame in sight, by all means have at it.
The Tories will be laughing and applauding (as they applauded Benn), but it’s your choice where you put your efforts.
Raife Keller-cooper
are you mental? The shadow foreign secretary showed yesterday what an effective, coherent opposition should look like by joining forces with the conservatives against 75% of his party, and 75% of the members and 66% of the people… All Benn showed was that he’s on the wrong side of the house, and the wrong side of history. A dark moment for the labour party and a dark moment for democracy. This piece disgusted me.
bluecatbabe
And just like the LibDems, Benn was against bombing Syria after the Paris atrocities – right up until the moment he was for it. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/hilary-benn-shadow-foreign-secretary-says-labour-wont-back-air-strikes-on-syria-a6734651.html
Selohesra
It is “hear hear” please – if you are going to comment on your own posts please get it right!
majestic whine
Just read your first sentence again. “The shadow foreign secretary showed yesterday what an effective, coherent opposition should look like”
This is a man who sided with the Tory party against his own party. Have you lost your mind?