Extracts from
PMQs
The Prime Minister: The Government have a fine record on climate
change, including our recent legislation on net zero emissions, but
there is an issue that needs to be addressed in this House. Before
the right hon. Gentleman stands up and parades himself as the
champion of climate change, the champion of the people or the
defender of equality and fairness, he needs to apologise for his
failure to deal with racism in the Labour party.
Just today, 60 distinguished members of the Labour party have
written in the newspapers:
“The Labour party welcomes everyone*…(*except, it seems,
Jews)…This is your legacy Mr Corbyn…You still haven’t opened your
eyes…You still haven’t told the whole truth…You still haven’t
accepted your responsibility…You have failed…the test of
leadership.”
: This party was the first to
introduce anti-racist legislation into law in Britain. This party
totally opposes racism in any form whatsoever. antisemitism has
no place in our society, no place in any of our parties and no
place in any of our dialogues. Neither does any other form of
racism.
Some 60% of Tory party members think Islam is a threat to western
civilisation. The Prime Minister has said that she will act on
Islamophobia within her own party. I hope she does. I look
forward to seeing that being dealt with, as we will deal with any
racism that occurs within our own party as well...
Extract from Commons
debate on the Bullying and Harassment of MPs’ Parliamentary
Staff
(Bassetlaw) (Lab):...The Liberal
Democrats have had problems, like every other party, but my
specialism is dealing with antisemitism and I will say that
the only political party I have met in the last three years that
has a robust process for dealing with antisemitism at
the moment is the Liberal Democrat party. The reason why I can
say that it is robust is that there are ways in which an external
person—someone not in the party, and who may be an opponent of
the party politically or electorally—can actually go in, make
complaints and hold the party institution to account if it fails
to take action. That does not mean it will necessarily draw the
right conclusions in my judgment and it does not mean people will
be coming forward, but it does mean people are far more likely to
have trust in the system. It is a transparent system, and that is
the key—it is not an opaque system—and it is impressive. The fact
that it is transparent and that I and others were able to go in
and say, “Well, you could perhaps change this, do it this way,
consider this, speak to that person,” was also very healthy
indeed...
To read the whole debate, CLICK
HERE
