Ruthless, but also indecisive — the Diane Abbott fiasco is a bad look for Keir Starmer
It’s such a long time ago, but it’s worth remembering how significant a moment Diane Abbott’s election to Parliament truly was.
That it took until 1987 for a black woman to enter the Commons is itself astonishing. That Ms Abbott has suffered vast levels of vile racist abuse throughout her career is shameful.
She has, undoubtedly, been a poor performer at times — but she has also been a trailblazer, her persistence winning admiration (at times grudging) from many who oppose almost all of her political beliefs.
Which makes Keir Starmer’s ham-fisted handling of her all the more puzzling, and raises legitimate questions about the man almost certain to be Britain’s Prime Minister in just a few weeks.
Diane Abbott says she’s been banned from standing as a Labour candidate — Sir Keir says that’s wrong — they can’t both be correct.
A needlessly long suspension
Starmer has been determined to prove he has removed the stain of anti-semitism from Labour, so when Ms Abbott wrote a letter to The Observer suggesting Jewish people (as well as Travellers) suffered prejudice but not racism, comparing their treatment to the ridiculing of redheads, she was always going to face consequences.
She apologised, but was suspended from the Parliamentary Labour Party. Thirteen months later, with an election looming, she remained suspended, even though the investigation into her actions was apparently settled months earlier.
As the campaign began, it seemed a deal had been reached. Diane Abbott would be readmitted to Labour just as Parliament was dissolved, but she would not stand for election again. She would end her 37-years in Parliament as she began — as a Labour MP — a dignified end to her time in the Commons.
Only someone then briefed The Times that Ms Abbott had been banned — prompting her to insist she intends to continue as an MP “by any means.”
Starmer can hide behind the fact that a final decision about Diane Abbott’s future rests with Labour’s ruling body, the National Executive Committee. But the idea that the NEC is in some way independent of the party leader is laughable.
If Keir Starmer wanted rid of Diane Abbott, he could have expelled her a year ago. Instead, he left her dangling until the last possible moment. In doing so, he appears both ruthless, perhaps even cruel, but also indecisive — unwilling to make a final decision that he knows would be unpopular with many party activists.
No room for dissent
When Tony Blair won his huge majority in 1997, he gathered his 419 MPs and told them “it’s not your job to tell us what to do.” It’s a lesson Keir Starmer appears to have learned.
At least two more left-leaning candidates have reportedly been banned from standing — some may feel the decisions justified, but the timing speaks to a party determined to exercise near-total control.
Now, instead of promoting Labour’s plans, or focusing on the Conservative Party’s track record, election commentary locks onto this entirely avoidable mess.
In any election, especially one you are very likely to win, this kind of scrutiny is inevitable, and entirely justified. In just a few weeks, Keir Starmer will almost certainly be Prime Minister, dealing every day with bigger and more important issues than this.
His mis-handling of Diane Abbott will offend many inside Labour who, frankly, already disliked him. But it raises legitimate questions about the man we are seemingly about to put into Downing Street.
Keir Starmer’s Labour Party had room within it for a hard-right Tory like Natalie Elphicke, but not for a trail-blazing black woman. That’s certainly quite a big change, if not perhaps the one Labour would like us to focus on.
