‘Not true' that Labour wants Diane Abbott out, minister says
Ms Abbott was previously suspended from the party after she suggested in 2023 that Jewish, Irish and Traveller people experience prejudice, but not racism.
She later apologised for the remarks and was readmitted just in time to stand as the Labour candidate in her seat at the general election last year.
But in an interview broadcast this week, Ms Abbott, the Mother of the House who has represented her constituency since 1987, said she did not regret the incident, which led to a second suspension.
Following her suspension, Ms Abbott told BBC Newsnight: 'It is obvious this Labour leadership wants me out.'
'That's absolutely not the case,' Mr Murray told Times Radio on Friday morning.
'What's happened is Diane has made some comments which come on the back of previous comments which she made and for which she apologised some time ago.'
He added that there was an internal investigation and 'we now need to let this process play out' so it can be resolved 'as swiftly as possible'. It comes after Sir Keir Starmer stripped the whip from four other Labour MPs for 'persistent breaches of discipline' as the Prime Minister seeks to reassert his grip on his back benches following a rebellion over welfare reform.
'Diane Abbott has been administratively suspended from the Labour Party, pending an investigation. We cannot comment further while this investigation is ongoing,' a Labour spokesperson said on Thursday.
Ms Abbott later said: 'It is obvious this Labour leadership wants me out.
'My comments in the interview… were factually correct, as any fair-minded person would accept.'
The original comments in 2023 were in a letter to The Observer newspaper, and she withdrew the remarks the same day and apologised 'for any anguish caused'.
In the interview with BBC Radio 4's Reflections programme, she was asked whether she looked back on the incident with regret.
'No, not at all,' she said.
'Clearly, there must be a difference between racism which is about colour and other types of racism, because you can see a Traveller or a Jewish person walking down the street, you don't know.
'You don't know unless you stop to speak to them or you're in a meeting with them.
'But if you see a black person walking down the street, you see straight away that they're black. There are different types of racism.'
She added: 'I just think that it's silly to try and claim that racism which is about skin colour is the same as other types of racism.'
Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner was asked if she was disappointed by the comments.
'I was. There's no place for antisemitism in the Labour Party, and obviously the Labour Party has processes for that,' she told The Guardian newspaper.
'Diane had reflected on how she'd put that article together, and said that 'was not supposed to be the version', and now to double down and say 'Well, actually I didn't mean that. I actually meant what I originally said', I think is a real challenge.'
Ms Abbott entered Parliament in 1987 and holds the honorary title of Mother of the House.
Her suspension comes in the same week that Sir Keir carried out a purge of troublesome backbenchers following a revolt over planned welfare reforms which saw the Government offer major concessions to rebels.
Rachael Maskell, who spearheaded plans to halt the Government's Bill, had the whip suspended alongside Neil Duncan-Jordan, Brian Leishman and Chris Hinchliff.
Party sources said the decision to suspend the whip was taken as a result of persistent breaches of discipline rather than a single rebellion.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Rhyl Journal
28 minutes ago
- Rhyl Journal
Keir Starmer keeping open mind on BBC licence fee axe
This comes as the fee, which costs £174.50 a year, comes under growing criticism in an age of greater competition. Addressing this, Culture Select Committee chair Dame Caroline challenged the Labour leader on the "regressive tax". According to The Sun, when asked about the future of the licence fee yesterday, Keir Starmer said: 'We're going through the review and it'll obviously come to its conclusion, and we keep an open mind on what we need to do with the licence fee. Keir Starmer said he was 'open-minded' about the future of the TV licence (Image: PA/Stefan Rousseau) "But we are working closely with the BBC.' The TV licence is a fee paid by households that watch, record or stream any television transmissions at the same time they are being broadcast. The fee was introduced in 1946, when TV broadcasting resumed in the aftermath of the Second World War. This licence was originally issued by the General Post Office, which was the regulator of public communications in the UK at that time. According to the TV Licensing website, the price of the fee changed last April, seeing the cost of a colour licence rise to £174.50 a year. The annual cost of the much rarer black and white TV licence is just £58.50. Those who are blind or severely sight-impaired can apply for a 50% concession on this, meaning the colour licence costs £87.25. There are also a number of other concessions and arrangements available for people living in certain types of residential care and for over-75s receiving Pension Credit.
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Sir James Cleverly to make frontbench comeback as Kemi Badenoch reshuffles team
A Conservative source said: 'The Leader of the Opposition will be making some changes to her frontbench team today. 'The changes reflect the next stage of the party's policy renewal programme and underline the unity of the party under new leadership. 'Sir James Cleverly is expected to return in a prominent frontbench role to take the fight to this dreadful Labour Government.' Kemi Badenoch is expected to carry out a shadow Cabinet reshuffle (Chris Radburn/PA) Sir James served as both foreign secretary and home secretary when the Conservatives were in power. He stood as a candidate in last year's Conservative leadership election, but lost out on the Tory top job ahead of the final heat between Mrs Badenoch and her now-shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick. Since the leadership contest, Sir James has returned to the Tory back benches as the MP for Braintree. He has used his influential position as a former minister to warn against pursuing populist agenda akin to Nigel Farage's Reform UK. Appearing at the Institute For Public Policy Research (IPPR) think tank last week, the senior Tory hit out at calls to 'smash the system' and 'start again from scratch', branding them 'complete nonsense'. He also appeared to take a different position on net zero from party leader Mrs Badenoch in a recent speech, urging the Conservatives to reject climate change 'luddites' on the right who believe 'the way things are now is just fine'. A list of full changes to the Conservative frontbench team will be announced on Tuesday afternoon.
New Statesman
an hour ago
- New Statesman
This government will live or die by housing
Photo byAfter a summer break, Labour want to take on Britain's 'dysfunctional' housing and land markets. They want to make them fairer for those who want to buy homes to live in and less of a boon for 'speculative' investors. And although Labour's much-awaited long-term housing strategy will not be published before recess, Housing and Planning Minister Matthew Pennycook has hinted that if year one was about laying the groundwork for Labour's housing plan, year two will be significantly more radical. It is a testament to the functionality of Pennycook's department – the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) – that it rarely makes headlines in the way that, say, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) or Treasury do. Between them, Rayner and Pennycook have delivered on manifesto commitments by tweaking legislation in a quietly radical and efficient way. The Renters' Rights Bill will soon become law. Similarly, the Planning and Infrastructure Bill is paving the way for urgent planning reform, which, though not radical for some because environmental considerations must still be factored into planning approval, will make clever tweaks to existing frameworks for delivering development, such as beefing up the compulsory purchase powers of public bodies to stop the sale of land for development at inflated prices. Leasehold reforms, similarly, have been amped up, and there is reportedly more to come. With legislative changes that former Tory Housing Secretary Michael Gove wanted but could never get through his own party, Pennycook wants to step things up and reform the housing market once and for all by 'addressing the financialisation of housing', and 'ending our overreliance on a speculative model of development that… constrains housing supply.' Punchy in theory, so how will it work in reality? Ministers are exploring ways to give people who want to buy homes to live in them, as opposed to as an investment, an advantage. This could include implementing rules that stipulate new homes can only be sold to local people who will live in them, as Cornwall Council have done to protect hard-won new housing developments and prevent new housing being sold to investors. Labour have suggested that they will similarly protect homes in their new towns. Developers who buy up land, obtain planning permission to build, but then, instead of actually building anything, sit on the land and wait for it to rise in value, will be penalised and blocked from planning permission in the future. The sites for a 'new generation' of around a dozen new towns, like those built post-war, have also been plotted on a map to be announced imminently. Pennycook is determined that these will be built out quickly and purposefully. Ministers are thought to be considering giving Homes England more regional power so that it can be involved in planning at a local level, ensuring that the right homes are built in the right places. New towns will also be overseen by development corporations with their own governance structure, taking some decisions away from local councils and putting them in the hands of bodies specifically tasked with getting things built. These public bodies will be able to invoke the new rules on compulsory purchase to get hold of land cheaply and build homes and infrastructure on it. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Rayner and Pennycook need to get this all over the line, and fast. The stakes couldn't be higher. Labour will be judged harshly on whether they can be bolder and go further than the governments of recent decades, who presided over an increasingly dysfunctional housing market and did little to nothing. But, more importantly, there is now not a single part of Britain which is not impacted by this country's sclerotic housing market. Since the 1970s, house price-to-income ratios have more than doubled nationwide, pricing younger generations out of homeownership, ushering in 35- and even 40-year mortgages, and trapping nearly 5 million households in an expensive and unstable private rental sector. That's more than the number living in social and council housing, which not only provides secure and affordable homes but also provides a return for the state through rent. None of this is new. The housing crisis was fast becoming one of the defining issues of modern life when Labour lost to David Cameron in 2010. But the situation is worse than it ever was. Week after week, new lows are reached. Housing makes headlines for all the wrong reasons. Rising homelessness is now such a grotesque new normal that it rarely makes a front page. So is the increasing number of homeless families, and, at last count, 164,000 children who are forced to live in temporary accommodation. That's anywhere from a hotel to a converted office block and, even, a converted shipping container. And, of course, these bleak statistics don't capture the misery of the people who can afford their rent, just as long as they don't put the heating on, let alone contemplate a holiday. They also don't tell the story of the anguish of young adults who can't afford family-sized homes, or who still live at home in their twenties and thirties, and those whose mortgages have recently jumped up due to higher rates, swallowing chunks of their disposable income in the process. The human suffering caused by expensive housing and homelessness also has an economic impact. Housing costs consume ever-larger amounts of public money. A rise in the number of lower-income households relying on private renting has meant that the Housing Benefit Bill is predicted to rise to £35bn by 2028. That's more than the total spend of many government departments. Temporary accommodation now costs councils £2.3bn a year. As the Chartered Institute for Housing has pointed out, these expanding bills mean only 12 per cent of government spending on housing in 2022 went towards new buildings, compared to 95 per cent in 1976. High rents and mortgage costs, relative to income, also mean that young people today, who are less likely to be homeowners than their elders, are spending disposable income that could be contributing to growth through either the consumption of goods and services or investment on their homes. In the end, those who do the reading draw the same conclusions about what William Beveridge described as 'the problem of housing' in this country back in 1942 – affordable housing is the only way to prevent people becoming homeless and unwell and, in doing so, reduce the pressure on the state to support them. Before he backed down on housing reform and bowed out, Gove had realised this. He started to talk about the problem that the impact of extractive 'rentier economics' was having in Britain. The phrase was not a borrowing from Gary Stevenson, let alone Friedrich Engels. Downstream from Adam Smith via Thomas Piketty, Gove said it during a 2024 interview with that leftie rag the Financial Times. The Tory grandee correctly identified that Britain's housing crisis would be the death knell for his party because younger generations were at the sharp end of it. After all, why would any young person vote Conservative if they have no assets to conserve? However you slice it, the housing crisis is emotionally and financially draining us all. Economists (like Smith and latterly Piketty) have pointed this out for centuries. Labour knows that fixing housing will be key to their electoral survival. But, more than that, they know that it is the right thing to do. With one year down and four left of Labour's first term, the clock is well and truly ticking. After all, imagine a baby born into homelessness, to a family with one bedroom emergency temporary accommodation when Labour entered Downing Street last year will be five and in need of space to grow and do homework and play in no time at all. [Further reading: Immigrants did not cause Britain's social housing shortage] Related
