Corbyn completes Shadow Cabinet reshuffle

The media is still finding it hard to understand how Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn operates. They have been goading him all over the winter break to undertake a Cabinet reshuffle – by which they mean man up, shout at some people, sack others so they know who’s boss, promote some more so they find out who’s boss – generally, pump a bit of testosterone about. That’s so not Jeremy’s style.

Corbyn took his time. He talked to his MPs. He talked to Shadow Cabinet members and potential Shadow Cabinet members. Where he could reach an accommodation, he did. That’s why Hilary Benn hasn’t been sacked – because he and Corbyn have come to an agreement. That’s why McFadden had to go – because he is beyond reasoning with (and pretty much always has been).

The result is a slightly tighter ship, with everyone reminded that Labour stands united in its aim of clawing back ground in Wales and Scotland and clawing back office in London come this May’s elections. Good. Now let’s get on with it.

Of course there are some bruised egos. Of course there are some MPs, selected during the Blair years or just thereafter with the support of Blair’s party machine, who just cannot cope with having a dented ego. Now that Labour Party members and supporters have so emphatically rejected the New Labour dogma, no one is very interested in what these dinosaurs have to say – except the press. The papers have run so many stories about how they had to stand in stairwells waiting for Jeremy, that they are delighted to cover what disgruntled MPs have to tell them. “Look at my ego,” the MPs say, “it’s all bruised. It’s got a big dent in. I thought I was part of the elite and now I’ve been swept away by a bigger mandate I just can’t cope.” At least we know what tomorrow’s fish and chips are going to be wrapped in.

[Adverts]

McFadden
Pat McFadden, MP for Wolverhampton South East, asked the following question of the Prime Minister in the House of Commons:
“May I ask the Prime Minister to reject the view that sees terrorist acts as always being a response or a reaction to what we in the west do? Does he agree that such an approach risks infantilising the terrorists and treating them like children, when the truth is that they are adults who are entirely responsible for what they do? No one forces them to kill innocent people in Paris or Beirut. Unless we are clear about that, we will fail even to understand the threat we face, let alone confront it and ultimately overcome it.”

What Jeremy Corbyn has always stood for is (and this in relation to several conflicts, over several decades) that you need political solutions to terrorism – not military ones. Corbyn (and Livingstone) were ridiculed for attempting to open dialogue with Sinn Fein, ten years before Tony Blair began to talk to them as part of the “peace process”. A world which has watched South Africa transition from apartheid to majority rule n a process which has been peaceful should recognise the value of dialogue. McFadden doesn’t: he has no answer to terrorism other than kill all the terrorists (and, ultimately, all their sympathisers). Such attitudes have prolonged conflict everywhere they have been tried.

Of course terrorism is no answer and of course individual terrorists should not express themselves through violence – and nor should states impose their will on others by force of arms either. The family huddled in a cellar in Gaza as Israeli bombs rain down and the family trying to got to a café in Paris without being shot are both victims of violence which should not be happening and which will solve nothing.

It is not just that McFadden doesn’t understand that distinction: he was a paid up member of the Blair machine which consciously adopted the military solution to terrorism and he wants to continue it against the treat of the negotiators. He is probably sincere in believing that UK voters believe that advocating military solutions is a welcome sign of strength. In fact, the public has grown quite tired of the expensive (in human and financial resources) military solutions and now is precisely the time to break all idea that there should be a consensus around such solutions.

McFadden was asking David Cameron to agree that he, McFadden, was right and was thereby indeed attacking Jeremy Corbyn. He will now have to live with the result.

[Adverts]

Changes on Labour’s front bench
•Michael Dugher was sacked as Shadow Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport.
•Pat McFadden was sacked as Shadow Minister for Europe.
•Maria Eagle leaves the Shadow Defence position and takes over Culture.
•Emily Thornberry becomes Shadow Secretary of State for Defence.

Resignations
Three MPs have now resigned from the front bench in protest at the two sackings. Again, these MPs have little sense of proportion. Jonathan Reynolds and Stephen Doughty resigned over the sacking of Pat McFadden: Reynolds saying he agreed with McFadden’s position on fighting terrorism; and Doughty because he thought McFadden had been made an example of, just for speaking honestly. Kevan Jones resigned because Emily Thornberry (a unilateralist) was chosen to replace Maria Eagle (a multilateralist): Mr Jones shared Ms Eagle’s views, so did not feel able to work with Ms Thornberry.

Now that Corbyn has such a large mandate from party members and supporters, the Labour Party has a plausible route to winning elections again. These moany old MPs who are sticking to the policies and practices which have lost the last two General Elections need to consider how best they can help save us from the ravages of even more Tory Governments – even if they have to put their delicate egos in their back pockets for a while to do so.

[Adverts]