Get all your news in one place.
100's of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Politics
Andrew Sparrow

Cameron announces Syria vote for Wednesday - Politics live

Jeremy Corbyn chairing his first shadow cabinet meeting.
Jeremy Corbyn chairing his first shadow cabinet meeting. Photograph: Sean Dempsey/PA

Summary

  • David Cameron has announced that there will be a one-day debate on Wednesday followed by a vote on authorising air strikes against Islamic State in Syria. His decision to hold the vote means he is confident of winning, and it follows Labour’s decision to give its MPs a free vote. Cameron has rejected calls from Labour and the SNP for a two-day debate. Cameron said:

I can announce that I will be recommending to cabinet tomorrow that we hold a debate and a vote in the House of Commons to extend the air strikes that we have carried out against Isil in Iraq to Syria, that we answer the call from our allies and work with them because Isil is a threat to our country and this is the right thing to do.

  • Labour MPs have criticised Corbyn at tonight’s PLP meeting. Margaret Beckett, the former deputy leader, complained that Corbyn’s office was dividing Labour MPs, and David Winnick said Momentum, the Corbynite pressure group, was acting as a party within a party.

That’s all from me.

Updated

The Press Association has just snapped a report confirming Nick’s tweet.

David Cameron has said he will call a one day debate and vote on air strikes in Syria in the House of Commons on Wednesday.

Updated

Cameron to hold a one-day debate on Syria on Wednesday

My colleague Nicholas Watt says the Syria debate will take place on Wednesday, and will last just one day.

Updated

Here is more from the PLP.

After the PLP a Corbyn aide briefed the media. Here are the key points.

  • Corbyn dismissed complaints raised at the PLP about Momentum (see 7.36am), the aide indicated. He said that Corbyn told the meeting that opening up the democracy of the Labour party, and consulting members, was a good thing. That was part of the platform on which Corbyn was elected, the aide said. But the aide said MPs were wrong to think that they were under threat of deselection from Momentum and other Corbyn supporters. And he said that Corbyn said abusive behaviour online was unacceptable.
  • The aide acknowledged that Ken Livingstone came in for criticism, but “I wouldn’t say a lot”, he added.
  • The tone of the meeting was generally “good-natured”, “serious” and “respectful”, the aide said. He said there was a lot of comment on both sides of the argument, but that there was “significant support for the leader”.
  • The aide claimed that there was still “a small minority” of MPs who found it difficult to come to terms with Corbyn’s election. “It was always bound to be a bumpy ride,” he said.

The PLP meeting has just broken up.

And here is more from the meeting.

More from the PLP meeting.

According to one person who was there, David Winnick complained strongly about what had been going on in the party. Winnick said that Momentum (the grassroots organisation set up to promote Jeremy Corbyn’s agenda) had become “a party within a party”. Winnick also apparently said the shake-down of Labour MPs by Corbynite (on social media, presumably) had become “completely unacceptable”.

And Margaret Beckett, the former deputy leader, complained that Corbyn’s office had tried to divide Labour MPs. “You cannot unite the party if the leaders’ office is determined to divide us,” she said, according to one account.

Asked how Corbyn appeared as these criticisms were being aired, the source replied: “Crouched.”

Someone on the right of the party has just come out of the PLP meeting and told reporters there was “a ferocity” at the meeting that he found “quite uplifting”.

Make of that what you will ...

The Conservative MP David Davis (who is opposed to air strikes) has also said that the government should hold a two-day debate on Syria. “If the government is seeking the authority of Parliament to undertake such a policy it should do so on the basis of the best-informed, and most carefully considered, debate, he said. “It is perfectly possible to fit a two-day debate in before Christmas while also giving the relevant select committees the time to review the issue in detail.”

Johanna Baxter, a member of Labour’s national executive committee, has said on Twitter she is writing to Iain McNicol, the general secretary, asking for an explanation as to how the results of the members’ survey about Syria (see 1.02pm) were analysed.

Earlier some readers were asking how the party was able to establish which respondents were party members when they did not have to give a membership number. A party spokeswoman told me that names were cross-referenced against members’ email addresses.

More applause from inside the PLP (polite, rather than wild). Quite a few MPs have left already and so it should be winding up soon.

This is from ITV’s Paul Brand.

MPs are starting to come out now. Wes Streeting hurried past the hacks joking about something being “purposeful”, and Steve Pound has just come past saying “it’s all going according to plan”.

Charlie Beckett, the media professor, is (like some of you BTL) a bit alarmed to discover how journalists cover the PLP.

My colleague Rafael Behr has published his assessment of today’s shadow cabinet decision. Here’s his conclusion.

Corbyn has settled for a show of strength as the standard-bearer of anti-war feeling on the left, but pulled back from all-out confrontation with MPs and shadow cabinet ministers. He has accepted a compromise, ingenious on paper but also meaningless in the traditions of Labour policy formation, whereby the leader gets to define what the official line is and the shadow cabinet is not obliged to follow that line. So for the time being, the civil war cools down again – until the next eruption of hostilities. Thus is confirmed a strange rule of Labour chaos, familiar from periods of dysfunction under Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband: just when it looks as if things cannot possible carry on like this, they do.

Another round of applause inside the PLP. It was for Jack Dromey, according to an MP who was leaving.

Another colleague has been told off by a doorkeeper for loitering too close to the door.

Here is the Guardian’s latest story about the shadow cabinet decision.

And here is an extract.

Cameron is expected make a statement outlining how he intends to proceed on Monday evening.

The Ministry of Defence has been told by some Labour MPs that about 60 MPs are willing to support airstrikes but that number might rise if the defence secretary allows time for a two-day debate and makes a serious effort to address Labour MPs’ concerns.

A senior Labour source said Labour MPs’ concerns were on points of genuine detail and were not an excuse to oppose airstrikes. The source suggested it might be necessary for MPs to be given as long as a fortnight for their issues to be addressed.

At the meeting, Corbyn’s team tried to defer the decision on how it would handle the issue of current party policy, but members of the shadow cabinet said they would not leave the room until a collective decision had been agreed.

We’re hearing loud, sustained applause now. For Hilary Benn?

As someone opened the door to go into the PLP, a voice inside suddenly became audible. It was Hilary Benn. But we only caught a few seconds and couldn’t tell what he was saying.

Inside the PLP there has now been a round of applause. But we don’t know for who, or for what.

SNP backs Labour's call for a two-day Syria debate

The SNP is backing Jeremy Corbyn’s call for a two-day debate on Syria. The party is also urging David Cameron to publish the text of his Syria motion as soon as possible. This is from Angus Robertson, the SNP’s leader at Westminster.

David Cameron must share his draft motion on Syria as early as possible.

The forthcoming decision on whether UK military action should be permitted in Syria is a key matter for all parties, members across the House of Commons, and the country at large.

With the Labour Party giving up its whip on a matter of war and peace- it is now the responsibility of the Scottish National Party to take the lead in holding the UK government to account.

Given the seriousness of the issue it is also only right that the prime minister allows for two days of full debate.

We’ve just heard some loud desk-banging from inside the PLP.

This is from ITV’s Paul Brand.

The PLP meeting is underway. Jeremy Corbyn came past accompanied by Lisa Nandy and Steve Rotheram.

A colleague wandered up towards the door to try to hear what was being said, but was ushered away by a Commons doorkeeper. They don’t mind us loitering in the corridor but they draw the line at eavesdropping.

The New Statesman’s Stephen Bush posted this on Twitter a few moments ago.

Seumas Milne, the former Guardian columnist and now Corbyn’s communications director, came past a few moments ago. Was this true, I asked him. No, he said firmly. It was “a pack of lies”.

PLP meets

Tonight’s meeting of the PLP (the parliamentary Labour party) is about to start. I’m in the committee room corridor in the Commons, where Labour MPs and peers are filing into a committee room.

We are not allowed to take photographs here, so I can’t tweet pictures. There are about 15 reporters standing outside, or sitting on the benches alongside the corridor.

Hilary Benn, the shadow foreign secretary, came past a few moments ago. A bigger crowd than usual, he said.

John Mann, the Labour MP, has written a blog explaining why he is going to vote against air strikes. As he writes, he is taking this position even though his own survey of his constituents found 32% saying he should vote in favour and 25% saying he should vote against.

Here’s an extract.

I have no problem with the ethics or morality of the UK being involved in military action to remove ISIS. They are a terrorist force that will continue their attempts to murder and enslave everyone who refuses to bow to their ideology and continue to attack the West.

However the proposal from David Cameron will fail.

A few extra planes attacking defined targets in Syria are neither a solution, nor are they much assistance. This approach is more of a gesture. Syria needs more than gestures.

The Liberal Democrats are also deciding their stance on air strikes today.

Sir Keir Starmer, the former director of public prosecutions and now Labour MP, has written an article for the Guardian saying that air strikes against Isis in Syria would be lawful but that he will be voting against.

This is from Huffington Post’s Paul Waugh.

Some 99 Labour MPs favour air strikes, Huffington Post claims.

Corbyn and Benn both plan to speak in Syria debate for Labour - putting alternative arguments

A senior Labour source has been briefing on behalf of the leadership about the shadow cabinet meeting. Here are the key points.

  • Jeremy Corbyn and Hilary Benn, the shadow foreign secretary, will both speak on behalf of the party in the Commons debate. Corbyn is against air strikes, while Benn is in favour. In the debate they will set out alternative views. The source admitted that this was “certainly unusual”. But he also said that, in this respect, Labour was would be reflecting “divided opinion in the country”.
  • Shadow cabinet members accepted that Labour members are opposed to air strikes. This meant Corbyn represented party opinion, the source said.

It is quite clear that individual Labour party members, affiliated supporters and registered supporters, are all in line with this ... Jeremy will be speaking for majority Labour party opinion, he will be speaking on the basis of Labour party policy and he will be speaking as the elected leader of the Labour party elected with a landslide no previous Labour leader could possibly enjoy.

The source said Corbyn was basing his view of established policy on his interpretation of the motion passed at conference, although the source admitted that “opinions differ” about this.

  • Labour wants the debate to be held next week at the earliest. The whole shadow cabinet supports the call for a two-day debate and, given Cameron is on a trip on Thursday, that makes a vote this week impractical, the source said. “There is no pressing need for the decision to be taken,” he added.
  • Labour wants the Conservatives to allow a free vote too, the source said.

Updated

Twitter got excited a few minutes ago about claims that Rosie Winterton, the Labour chief whip, is resigning. But Labour sources are firmly saying that she isn’t.

The debate on Syria may be postponed, my colleague Patrick Wintour reports.

My colleague Patrick Wintour has more from the shadow cabinet meeting.

The Stop the War Coalition has posted a tweet implicitly criticising Jeremy Corbyn’s decision to give Labour MPs a free vote. Earlier it said Labour MPs should not get a free vote. (See 11.10am.)

Corbyn backs down over trying to make opposing air strikes party policy

Earlier journalists were briefed that, as part of a compromise, Jeremy Corbyn would offer Labour MPs a free vote while asserting that party policy was to oppose air strikes. (See 2.06pm.) But the Labour statement (see 4.35pm) does not say anything about this, effectively confirming reports (see 4.32pm) that Corbyn backed down on this issue.

This means party policy on Syria remains as set out in the emergency motion passed at conference - the one intended as an anti-war motion but which is now being cited by both supporters and opponents of air strikes as justifying their stance. (See 11.42am.)

But the shadow cabinet has united behind what might be deemed a delaying strategy: arguing for a two-day debate, and seeking further clarification from David Cameron on certain issues.

Updated

Labour confirms MPs to get a free vote

Labour has put out a statement about shadow cabinet. Here it is in full. It is from a spokesman for Jeremy Corbyn.

Today’s shadow cabinet agreed to back Jeremy Corbyn’s recommendation of a free vote on the government’s proposal to authorise UK bombing in Syria.

The shadow cabinet decided to support the call for David Cameron to step back from the rush to war and hold a full two day debate in the House of Commons on such a crucial national decision.

Shadow cabinet members agreed to call David Cameron to account on the unanswered questions raised by his case for bombing: including how it would accelerate a negotiated settlement of the Syrian civil war; what ground troops would take territory evacuated by Isis; military co-ordination and strategy; the refugee crisis and the imperative to cut-off of supplies to Isis.

Updated

The shadow cabinet meeting has broken up. There are reports that Jeremy Corbyn’s attempt to insist that party policy would be to oppose air strikes, while allowing MPs a free vote, came under fire, but how this has been ultimately resolved is not yet entirely clear.

This is from the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg.

The problem with the shadow cabinet deciding to agree to stick with the position agreed by the party at conference is that the two sides in this debate cannot decide whether the conference motion supports air strikes or whether it doesn’t. (See 11.41am.)

The Muslim Council of Britain, an umbrella group representing British Muslims, has put out a statement saying it is opposed to air strikes against Isis (or Daesh, as it calls it). Here’s an extract.

Most British Muslims believe that air strikes in Syria will not only be ineffective in destroying Daesh, it will also be another recruiting sergeant for the terrorists. As more innocent people die from the air strikes, the appeal of Daesh will strengthen. Daesh craves more Western military intervention in the region to corroborate its hateful narrative. As such, we would urge MPs to learn the lessons of the past, and not to vote for extending air strikes over Syria.

We agree and support the notion that the first duty of government is to ensure the safety of its citizens. But a convincing case has not been made as to how these air strikes will do this. There is no doubt that Daesh does need to be defeated. And we urge our government to deploy its considerable diplomatic influence to create the political, economic and strategic conditions for Daesh to be rendered impotent.

The Number 10 afternoon lobby briefing was not particularly enlightening. David Cameron will respond to Jeremy Corbyn’s letter proposing a two-day debate on Syria, the prime minister’s spokesman said. He would not tell us what the reply will say, or whether Cameron will grant a two-day debate, but he did point out that Cameron took questions in the Commons on this for three hours last week, which is perhaps a hint that Cameron thinks a two-day debate is unnecessary.

The spokesman confirmed that there is still no timetable for a debate. Cameron said last week that it was important to act, but also that it was important for the Commons to consider the matter, the spokesman said.

And the spokesman would not say whether Labour’s decision to allow a free vote made a debate more likely. Asked about this, he just said:

Ultimately the prime minister has always been clear that he will only bring this to the House for their consent when there is a clear majority in the House for action.

More from the shadow cabinet meeting.

From the Morning Star’s Luke James

From the BBC’s Iain Watson

I’m off to the Number 10 lobby briefing now. I will post again after 4.15pm.

Caroline Lucas, the Green MP, has welcomed Labour’s decision to allow a free vote.

George Galloway, the former MP and Respect candidate for London mayor, has criticised Jeremy Corbyn for conceding a free vote on Syria.

Sturgeon criticises Corbyn for making air strikes more likely

It hasn’t taken Nicola Sturgeon, the SNP leader and Scottish first minister, long to attack Labour for its Syria decision.

Updated

Corbyn's Syria decision - Snap analysis

The shadow cabinet meeting is still going on, and presumably we will get a more detailed statement of the party’s thinking later, but here are some preliminary thoughts on what it means.

1) Is it a climbdown?

Broadly, yes. Some of the spin seems to be presenting this as a Corbyn compromise, a two-and-a-half line whip, and not a conventional free vote, but if members of the shadow cabinet are being allowed to vote for air strikes without having to resign, then this is a free vote, whether Labour chooses to call it that or not. This represents a climbdown because Corbyn had been resisting pressure to allow one. Last week he said explicitly he was not offering a free vote and even yesterday he said on the Andrew Marr Show he hoped Labour would “come to a decision as a party”. Len McCluskey, the Unite leader and a Corbyn ally on this issue, said Labour could not be “free-for-all” party. But effectively now, on this issue, that is what it has become.

2) Does this make a vote in favour of air strikes inevitable?

It is certainly much more likely, but it is not certain yet. We have not had a response from Number 10 to the Labour news, and so it has not been confirmed that there will be a debate this Wednesday. Corbyn’s request for a two-day debate (see 2.47am) looks fairly reasonable, but Number 10 will be reluctant to timetable a debate for Wednesday/Thursday because of the Oldham byelection and because Cameron has a trip lined up for Thursday, and so conceding a two-day debate could push the vote back to next week. Corbyn seems to be working on the assumption that opinion is swinging his way in the PLP and that, the longer a vote is delayed, the more reluctant Labour MPs will be to vote in favour of air strikes. At the weekend some sources were briefing the papers that the Tory whips expected 80 Labour MPs to vote with Cameron for air strikes. If Cameron believes that figure to be robust, he will schedule a vote for Wednesday. But we don’t know for sure that he does.

3) How damaging is this for Corbyn?

Corbyn’s leadership faces multiple problems (for starters, try reading Jonathan Freedland’s column on Saturday, or Ian Warren’s research today about how out of touch Corbyn is with public opinion) but, to his credit, this afternoon Corbyn does seem to have averted a crisis. As I said earlier (see 8.55am), a confrontation of this kind illustrates where power lies in the party and Corbyn is not the first Labour leader to discover that, just because he wants something, he cannot necessarily get it past his colleagues. (Tony Blair can tell him something about this, in the unlikely event that they ever meet for a chat.) But you do not change the culture of a party overnight and, by getting Labour to assert that it is anti-bombing in principle (if not actually in practice, because of the free vote) he is nudging it in a new and radical direction. And, as Tim Shipman points out (see 2.46pm), this rhetorical rebranding will help grassroots Corbynites to put pressure on MPs, not just ahead of this vote, but in the future too. Corbyn may have been forced into a tactical retreat today but, in the long-term, the Corbynite transformation of Labour continues.

UPDATE AT 5.30PM: It is now clear that Corbyn failed to get the shadow cabinet to agree that opposing air strikes was party policy. Journalists were briefed to that effect before the meeting started, but that plank of the compromise collapsed and so the paragraph above is misleading. Today has been a bigger setback for Corbyn than it looked at 3.20pm.

Updated

Corbyn writes to Cameron demanding two-day debate on Syria

Labour has released the text of a letter Jeremy Corbyn has sent to David Cameron on Syria. Here it is in full.

Dear David,

As of this morning we have not had a clear proposal from the government on when you plan to bring forward a motion to the House on air strikes in Syria or on arrangements for the debate.

In the view of the Opposition on a matter of such critical importance there must be full and adequate time for any debate in the House and only a full two day debate would ensure time for all Members who wish to participate to be able to do so.

As has happened previously a one day debate would inevitably lead to important contributions being curtailed. It is incumbent on us all to ensure the country feels there has been the fullest parliamentary discussion of what you have rightly described as a highly complex situation. In addition the debate would be much better informed by views from the Foreign Affairs and Defence Select Committees following your recent statements.

Please can you provide an assurance that any proposal the government brings forward will be on the basis that there will be a two day debate in the House of Commons.

Yours sincerely

Jeremy Corbyn MP

Leader of the Opposition

Here is some more Twitter reaction to Jeremy Corbyn’s free vote decision.

From the politics academic Rob Ford

From Marcus Roberts, the Labour activist and former Fabian Society deputy general secretary

From Karim Palant, Ed Balls’ former head of policy

From Andy Sawford, a former Labour MP

From LabourList’s Conor Pope

From Sky News’s Faisal Islam

From the New Statesman’s George Eaton

Jeremy Corbyn is also pushing for a two-day debate on Syria, the Mirror’s Kevin Maguire says.

The Sunday Times’s Tim Shipman has the best Tweet-length description of what Jeremy Corbyn’s decision means.

The BBC’s Andrew Neil says Jeremy Corbyn’s decision means the Commons will vote for air strikes.

Corbyn to allow Labour MPs a free vote

Jeremy Corbyn is to offer a free vote to MPs on David Cameron’s proposals for UK to bomb Isis in Syria but will make clear that Labour party policy is to oppose airstrikes.

The Labour leader will also press Cameron to delay the vote until Labour’s concerns about the justification for the bombing are addressed, as part of a deal he has thrashed out with the deputy leader, Tom Watson, and other senior members of the shadow cabinet over the weekend.

His decision averts the threat of a mass shadow cabinet walkout while making it clear that his own firmly-held opposition to airstrikes is official Labour party policy, backed by the membership.

It will also create a dilemma for Number 10 about whether to press ahead with the vote this week, because undecided Labour MPs are likely to be tempted to back Corbyn’s call for a longer timetable.

Cameron has been expected to try for a vote on Wednesday but he has said he will not do so unless he is sure there is a clear majority in favour of strikes.

It is understood has been no discussion with Number 10 about Labour’s proposals to put off the vote.

Lunchtime summary

  • Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader, has been preparing for a shadow cabinet meeting starting at 2pm which could possibly decide whether the Commons votes to bomb Islamic State (Isis) in Syria. Corbyn is opposed to air strikes and his allies have hinted that he is minded to order Labour MPs to vote against. Diane Abbott, one of his closest allies, told the Today programme this morning that allowing a free vote would give David Cameron “victory on a plate”. But Abbott also said Corbyn wanted to avoid “sackings or resignations”, suggesting some sort of compromise may be considered (see 8.55am), and John McDonnell, another key Corbyn ally, said he thought the shadow cabinet would “hold together”. (See 10.07am.) Corbyn himself gave no indication as to his thinking when he was doorstepped by reporters this morning outside his home. If Labour MPs do get a free vote, Cameron will almost certainly have a majority for air strikes and there will probably be a Commons vote on Wednesday. If Corbyn does whip Labour MPs to vote against air strikes Cameron may still press ahead with a vote, but it is also possible that in those circumstances he could decide to call it off.
  • Labour has said an analysis of replies it received to an online consultation suggests that 75% of party members are opposed to air strikes. (See 1.02pm.) More than 100,000 people replied, of whom almost 65,000 were Labour members, it said in a statement.
  • Chris Bryant, the shadow leader of the Commons, has indicated that he is in favour of air strikes. Speaking on the Daily Politics, he said he hoped Labour MPs would get a free vote. (See 12.45pm.)
  • The Stop the War Coalition has said it is opposed to Labour MPs being allowed a free vote. (See 11.10am.)
  • Bex Bailey, a member of Labour’s national executive committee, has said the conditions set by Labour when it passed a motion on air strikes at its September conference (see 11.41am) have been met. As Nicholas Watt reports, she was responding to a letter Corbyn sent to NEC members asking for their views. In her reply Bailey, who represents Young Labour on the NEC, said it was a matter for MPs. She went on:

Our job is to look after the Labour party and uphold the constitution. That is what young members and young trade unionists elected me to do. Decisions on issues such as extending military air strikes into Syria were not in my remit – or that of any other NEC member – when I was elected ... It would seem to me, having looked very carefully at the information available, that the terms of the emergency resolution passed at the 2015 Labour party conference have been met. It should now be up to MPs – not the NEC – to make the decision about whether Britain joins France and the US in extending military air strikes in Syria.

Updated

Labour says its survey suggests 75% of members opposed to air strikes

Labour says that 75% of party members who responded to Jeremy Corbyn’s email consultation were opposed to air strikes against Isis in Syria.

The party received more than 100,000 responses, the party has said in a statement. But it does not seem have have read them all in full, because it says in the footnote that the figures in this statement are based on a sample of replies from 1,900 party members.

Here is the statement

A sample of this weekend’s consultation of Labour Party members, carried out in response to an email from Jeremy Corbyn, issued Friday 27th November, has shown that 75 per cent of Labour party members who have responded oppose UK bombing in Syria.

107,875 responses were received of which 64,771 were confirmed as full individual Labour Party members. The remainder included affiliated supporters and registered supporters.

Random sampling, of full individual Labour Party members who responded to the email, has shown:

75 per cent are against UK bombing in Syria

13 per cent are for UK bombing in Syria

11 per cent are undecided on the issue.

This 75% figure is quite a lot higher than the figure YouGov produced when it surveyed Labour members last week. It found that only 58% of Labour member were opposed to air strikes. (See 10.36am) But that is because this is a self-selecting survey, rather than a proper poll, and in survey like this the views of those highly motivated to participate always tend to be over-represented.

My colleague Patrick Wintour has the latest from the Number 10 lobby briefing. Downing Street still does not have a timetable for a vote on air strikes, but more briefings are being organised for some MPs.

Chris Bryant, the shadow leader of the Commons, has just told the Daily Politics that he would prefer Jeremy Corbyn to give his MPs a free vote on Syria. Bryant indicated that he was in favour of air strikes.

It would be on my conscience, to be honest, if there were another attack by [Isis] on British targets, either in this country or overseas, like tourists or whatever, and we were not to have authorised the use of force against them ...

If a constituent of mine were on holiday somewhere, or were in London, and there was an [Isis] attack and they were killed, would I have failed in my duty by refusing to countenance military strikes? I know all the dangers that there are; there’s not a coherent plan, I’m not always convinced by David Cameron and all the rest of it. But in the end would I have failed that person?

Chris Bryant
Chris Bryant Photograph: BBC

Here is BBC footage of Jeremy Corbyn being doorstepped by reporters as he left his home this morning. He did not answer questions about Syria, but he told the press pack they were being “very rude”.

The Labour MP Ian Mearns has suggested that some of his colleagues are using the Syria issue to undermine Jeremy Corbyn.

He also thinks the Labour split is getting too much media attention.

Mearns supported Andy Burnham in the Labour leadership contest.

(And there is an answer to Mearns’s question. It’s because the Labour split is much larger than the Tory one, and more significant. If the prime minister and the foreign secretary were saying completely contradictory things about bombing Syria, I can assure you it would be leading the news.)

This is from the BBC’s Norman Smith.

The shadow cabinet meeting is now scheduled for 2pm, Labour is saying.

More than 100,000 people have signed a Commons petition saying the government should not launch air strikes against Isis in Syria. “There is no one solution that should be considered, but murdering people will just make things worse,” it says.

The Labour MP Rupa Huq has just told the Daily Politics that she is currently not planning to vote for air strikes against Isis in Syria.

The Labour MP Jo Stevens has written a blog saying she will be voting against air strikes in Syria.

Bex Bailey, the Young Labour representative on Labour’s national executive committee, has told Jeremy Corbyn that MPs, not the NEC, should decide policy on air strikes against Isis in Syria. She also think the conditions set down in Labour’s conference motion (see 11.54am) have been met.

According to Gary Gibbon’s latest blog about Labour, my old Guardian colleague Seumas Milne, who is now Jeremy Corbyn’s communications chief, is the key figure urging Corbyn not to compromise with his pro-air strike shadow cabinet colleagues. Here’s an extract.

Whatever happened to the mild-mannered pluralist who implied clashes like this could be smoothed over? The answer appears to be: Seumas Milne.

The veteran Guardian columnist has tried to inject steel into the Corbyn project. This weekend he recruited Len McCluskey to lend a hand, knowing how many MPs are Unite-sponsored.

He recruited Diane Abbott to work the airwaves.

Until Seumas Milne’s arrival you would’ve said John McDonnell was the key counsel, never more than the moment he convinced Jeremy Corbyn to make him shadow chancellor against a lot of advice from others.

But it feels right now that Mr Milne, careful to put “strategy” in his job title along with “communications,” is the key figure. Shadow ministers say he spoke for Jeremy Corbyn at key meetings. One shadow cabinet member said you wonder who is the master and who the aide when you see Seumas Milne and Jeremy Corbyn together. You get a sense of Dirk Bogarde’s “The Servant” listening to some anecdotes.

The Stop the War Coalition statement (see 11.10am) refers to the emergency motion passed at the Labour conference on Syria. It set four conditions for the Labour party agreeing to air strikes against Isis: authorisation from the United Nations; a comprehensive plan for humanitarian assistance for any refugees who may be displaced by the action; assurances that the bombing is directed exclusively at military targets associated with Isis; and that any military action is subordinated to international diplomatic efforts to end the war in Syria.

I can’t find a full text of the motion, but it was identical or very similar to this one that was circulating in advance.

At the time, as became clear when the debate took place, the motion was intended to make it almost impossible for Labour to back air strikes. Although it said Labour could back air strikes if certain conditions were met, in parliamentary terms it was a wrecking amendment because those speaking in favour of the motion seemed to assume that those conditions were unachievable. At that point it was assumed that there would be no UN resolution backing air strikes because Russia would veto it.

Now there is a debate in Labour as to whether or not those conditions have been met.

Interestingly, in the Commons last week, it was David Cameron who was keen to quote the motion. At least twice he told MPs that he thought his plans passed the tests set by Labour conference. Jeremy Corbyn (who has spoken of given the party conference more power) did not mention it.

Corbyn’s allies claim that the Labour tests have not been met. Jon Lansman explains why in this blog for Left Futures.

But at the shadow cabinet meeting last week Hilary Benn, the shadow foreign affairs secretary, Tom Watson, the deputy leader, and Lord Falconer, the shadow justice secretary, all reportedly argued that Cameron’s plans did pass the Labour tests.

The Stop the War Coalition (which used to be chaired by Jeremy Corbyn until he stood down shortly after becoming Labour leader) has put out a statement today saying Labour MPs should not get a free vote on Syria. Here it is.

The Stop the War Coalition is opposed to Labour MPs having a free vote on the Syria bombing issue if/when David Cameron brings it to the Commons for a decision. We note Labour conference policy vote on the matter, passed overwhelmingly only two months ago, and feel that all the conditions on this have not yet been fulfilled. We feel that a free vote – in effect giving Labour MPs permission to ignore this conference policy – will detract considerably from its impact.

In addition, it is becoming increasingly clear that Cameron will use the decision to call a free vote as a green light to call a vote in parliament as soon as this Wednesday. This would make war much more likely.

No doubt some MPs would rebel against a whip on this issue and vote for bombing in any case. But a free vote will certainly maximise their number and therefore both make it easier for the Tories to secure a Commons majority for war, as well as undermining Jeremy Corbyn’s position and that of the Labour conference. If, on the other hand, Cameron knew that Labour was to impose a whip in opposition to war, this might be sufficient to discourage him from bringing the matter to the House in the first place.

In her Today interview Diane Abbott said that she did not want to see Labour MPs given a free vote on air strikes, but she hinted that some kind of compromise might be possible. (See 8.55pm.) John McDonnell also this morning claimed it might be possible to avoid resignations. (See 10.07am.)

HuffingtonPost’s Paul Waugh is speculating as to a possible solution.

The problem with this is that it would, in practice, amount to a free vote.

The Labour MP Graham Jones says Corbyn’s email (see 10.46am) amounts to “push polling”.

(“Push polling” refers to an activity that looks like a survey but which in fact is intended to influence opinion. It is generally regarded as underhand because it is associated with polling questions that make false allegations [‘If you knew X was a wife-beater, would you be less likely to vote for them’] but the comments in Corbyn’s email about the government’s case for air strikes are all reasonable.)

Jones also does not believe that the 70,000 emails can be properly scrutinised.

The Labour consultation does not appear to have been especially rigorous. On Twitter plenty of people have complained about party members not getting emails, or of joke replies being allowed.

This is from the Labour MP John Mann.

This is from Philip Collins, the former speechwriter to Tony Blair and now a Times columnist.

From the Guardian’s Patrick Wintour.

From Sky’s Sophy Ridge.

Here is the text of the email that Jeremy Corbyn sent to party members at the end of last week asking their views on Syria. Labour has reportedly received more than 70,000 replies.

They are “overwhelmingly against” air strikes, Laura Kuenssberg reports.

This is not surprising. Last week YouGov published the results of a poll of Labour members (pdf) showing that they were against air strikes - even though the public at large is in favour. Here are the key figures.

Do you approve or disapprove of the RAF taking part in air strikes against Isis in Syria?

Approve

All GB adults - 58%

Labour voters - 49%

Labour members - 28%

People who voted for Corbyn in the Labour leadership contest - 16%

Amongst the public at large (ie, GB adults), 58% are in favour of air strikes, and 22% against.

Amongs Labour members, 28% are in favour of air strikes, and 58% are against.

Updated

McDonnell plays down prospect of shadow cabinet resignations over Syria

John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor and a key ally of Jeremy Corbyn’s, was doorstepped by Sky News as he left his home this morning. It was a fairly fleeting interview, but some lines emerged.

  • McDonnell played down the prospect of Corbyn’s decision leading to shadow cabinet resignations.

I think we will arrive at a common position and people will hold together.

  • He said that Corybyn had consulted extensively over the weekend and that he would put a proposal to the shadow cabinet.
  • McDonnell said that a majority of party members were opposed to air strikes.
  • He said that he was still personally in favour of Labour MPs being given a free vote, but he said Corbyn had to take other views into account too.
  • He said “quite a few Conservative MPs” were now opposed to air strikes. As examples, he cited David Davis and Julian Lewis.

Updated

Ian Murray, the shadow Scottish secretary, told the BBC’s Good Morning Scotland this morning that he thought Jeremy Corbyn should give Labour MPs a free vote on Syria.

It may be that the shadow cabinet decides to have a free vote on this and allow people to express their views. The problem that I think Jeremy has got, the problem that the leader of the opposition has, is that he has never abided by the discipline of the leader or of the shadow cabinet. He may try and impose this on the shadow cabinet. I think that would be wrong in this particular instance because I think people have very strong views one way or another.

Murray said that he was opposed to air strikes. And he said he thought David Cameron might decide not to have a vote.

If there is a vote held this week then I would vote against. But the reason the Prime Minister won’t bring a vote to the House of Commons is that he doesn’t have his own party on side either.

LabourList has the text of Jeremy Corbyn’s letter to members of the NEC. It says it was sent on Sunday. Here it is.

Dear all

Further to the Prime Minister’s statement last week and ahead of a vote on the UK bombing of Syria, I want to consult with the Party on what Britain should do.

As you know, I have written to our members as well as the PLP and a meeting with the Shadow Cabinet will take place tomorrow. As a member of the Party’s governing body, it is also important to hear your views.

I would be grateful therefore if you could reply to this email at your earliest convenience regarding your thoughts on how the Party should proceed and whether we should support the Government proposal to commence airstrikes in Syria.

Yours Jeremy

According to the Sun’s Steve Hawkes, Jeremy Corbyn has now written to Labour’s national executive committee about Syria. It was reported at the weekend that he was planning to do this to ask if the NEC to rule on whether or not the government’s plans for air strikes meet the conditions set in the Syria motion passed by the Labour conference in September.

I will post more on this when I get it.

In recent years the NEC has only had a very limited role in deciding party policy, but Corbyn wants to get it involved because his supporters are in a narrow majority on the NEC; in the shadow cabinet, the Corbynites are easily outnumbers.

In her Today interview Diane Abbott said that it was for the party leader to decide how Labour MPs are whipped to vote, not the shadow cabinet. This is what Corbyn himself said in his interview on the Andrew Marr Show yesterday.

But PoliticsHome’s Kevin Schofield says the PLP’s standing orders tell a different story. He says section R3, which governs Commons votes, says:

While the party recognises the right of members to abstain from voting in the House on matters of deeply held personal conviction, any such personal intention shall be intimated in advance and as soon as possible to the chief whip. This does not entitle members to vote contrary to a decision of the cabinet/shadow cabinet.

Sky’s Sophy Ridge has been speaking to an unnamed member of the shadow cabinet who is furious with Jeremy Corbyn’s handling of this affair.

According to the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg there has been some talk of holding the shadow cabinet meeting at 10pm, not 1pm, but other shadow ministers think it is still scheduled for lunchtime.

A party spokesman told me just a few minutes ago it was happening at 1pm.

Politics is ultimately about power and today we’re going to witness an extraordinary drama that is going to determine who holds the upper hand in Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour party: Corbyn and his insurgent leadership team, channelling the politics of the grassroots establishment, or the party’s parliamentary establishment, represented by most MPs and a majority of the shadow cabinet.

Corbyn wants to vote against David Cameron’s plan to extend air strikes against Islamic State (Isis) to Syria. Most members of the shadow cabinet, as well as a significant number of Labour MPs are in favour, and at the end of last week it looked as if this could result in a messy compromise, with Corbyn allowing a free vote.

But now it looks as if there will be a proper showdown. Although Corbyn has not yet taken a final decision, the briefing from his camp this morning suggests he is minded not to back down - and to insist that the party does vote against air strikes. Here’s the Guardian’s overnight story. And this is what the BBC’s Norman Smith has been reporting this morning.

This morning Diane Abbott, the shadow international development secretary and effectively a personal spokeswoman for Corbyn on issues like this, was on the Today programme. She was similarly robust, saying that a free vote would give David Cameron “victory on a plate”, but she also dropped a couple of intriguing hints about potential compromise solutions.

Here are the key points.

  • Abbott said that allowing Labour MPs a free vote on Syria would give David Cameron “victory on a plate”.

We are a party of government and a party of government has to have a position on matters of peace and war. The problem about a free vote is that it hands victory to Cameron over these airstrikes, it hands victory to him on a plate. I don’t think that’s what party members want to see.

But she also said that whipping rules were effectively “different” for backbenchers than they were for frontbenchers. It was not entirely clear what she meant by this, but she could have been suggesting that Corbyn might try to whip shadow ministers, but not backbenchers. (This would not help a great deal, because it is the threat of people like Tom Watson, the deputy leader, and Hilary Benn, the shadow foreign secretary, voting with Cameron that is particularly damaging, but it would reduce the size of the overall rebellion.)

  • Abbott said Corbyn did not want to see “sackings or resignations”.

I do know that Jeremy does not want to have either sackings or resignations. None of us want to lose valued colleagues.

This may have been a hint that Corbyn will appeal to colleagues to abstain if they disagree with him, rather than to vote with Cameron. Or would he say that they can vote with Cameron and still serve in the shadow cabinet? By the normal rules of politics that would be impossible, but Labour is heading into unchartered waters, so conceivably anything is possible.

  • She said Labour members and supporters wanted the party to oppose air strikes.
  • She claimed public opinion was turning against air strikes.

I think public opinion is moving towards us in opposing the rush to war, that’s why so many right-wing newspapers and commentators are opposed to the Syrian airstrikes.

  • She claimed that Cameron’s case for air strikes was “unravelling, particularly in relation to whether the troops on the ground will come from.”

I will be focusing mostly on this story throughout the day.

The key timings are:

1pm: The shadow cabinet meets.

6pm: The parliamentary Labour party meets.

If you want to follow me on Twitter, I’m on @AndrewSparrow.

Updated

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100's of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
Rowntree’s trust appoints Keon West to tackle brand’s colonial history
Author and academic says role is a chance ‘to make real, meaningful changes’ as trust confronts links to enslavement
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Elvis Presley's 1968 Pool-Side Furniture Captures the Retro Look Designers Say is Set to be on All the Chicest Patios in Summer 2026
Ornate metal outdoor furniture was everywhere in Elvis' era, but nearly 60 years on, it's making a reappearance in a big way
Homes & Gardens
Homes & Gardens
Hilary Duff visited by late, ex-boyfriend Aaron Carter during psychic session
Singer and actress Hilary Duff was visited by her late, former boyfriend Aaron Carter, who died in 2022 aged 34, during a psychic reading.
BANG Premier
BANG Premier
Is YTB Fatt Dead? Truth Behind Grandma's House Shootout as New Details Reveal What Really Happened
Viral social media posts falsely claimed rapper YTB Fatt was shot dead. Discover the truth behind the incident and how misinformation spread.
International Business Times UK
International Business Times UK
World’s oldest tortoise caught in viral crypto death scam
Fake X account posing as his vet sparked global false reports of Jonathan’s death while soliciting crypto donations
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Flirting like it’s 1890: I gave this Victorian-inspired ‘acquaintance card’ to a stranger. Here’s how it went
Unlucky in love? Maybe ditch the apps. This new twist on Victorian-era ‘flirtation cards’ could spark your next meet-cute
The Guardian - US
The Guardian - US
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.
Download on the AppStore Get it on Google Play