Chris Mason: Why Labour had little choice but to suspend Diane Abbott again

Political parties, like the rest of us, are forever confronting choices.

But, also like the rest of us, sometimes those choices are rather limited if maintaining consistency is seen to be important.

It is this that lies at the heart of the latest chapter in the long running saga of Diane Abbott and the Labour Party.

A saga whose central character is pioneering and history making: Diane Abbott was the first black woman ever elected to the House of Commons and is now the Mother of the House, the most long standing female MP, having been first elected in 1987.

The roots of this latest row are traced back to April 2023, when Abbott wrote a 118 word letter to The Observer newspaper.

You can read that letter here.

Her precise words then and her precise words now are worth attention, but what really matters is what led to her suspension as a Labour MP then is the very thing that has led to it now – because, crucially, she has now said she doesn’t regret those initial remarks.

So what did she say in 2023?

She wrote: “Irish, Jewish and Traveller people undoubtedly experience prejudice. This is similar to racism. It is true that many types of white people with points of difference, such as redheads, can experience this prejudice. But they are not all their lives subject to racism.”

In other words, she appeared to equate antisemitism with the prejudice experienced by people with ginger hair.

At the time she withdrew the remarks and apologised and was suspended – and so sat as an independent MP.

She was reinstated in the nick of time to stand as a Labour candidate in last year’s general election.

Now, in a BBC interview for Radio 4 recorded in May but broadcast this week, she was asked to reflect on the whole row.

Asked if she regretted the whole thing, crucially she said “no, not at all.”

She added: “Clearly there must be a difference between racism which is about colour and other types of racism.”

This is because, she said, someone’s skin colour is instantly, visibly noticeable, whereas being Jewish, for instance, is not.

Her language has changed since that letter in 2023 – she now describes antisemitism as racism, rather than a prejudice.

And she again condemned antisemitism.

But that lack of regret is what is central here, because she is saying she doesn’t regret the very words that led to her first suspension.

And therefore if the Labour Party wanted to be consistent, it had little choice but to do what it did last time, and suspend her again.

Political context is crucial here too: Labour was riven by rows about antisemitism during Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership and the party was found responsible for three breaches of the Equality Act by the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

When Sir Keir Starmer became Labour leader, he promised to “tear out this poison by its roots.”

So – as a result of Labour’s recent history – an unflinching attitude to dealing with anything regarded as antisemitic has always been central to Sir Keir’s leadership.

In a statement reacting to her suspension, Abbott has 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.”

Again she finds herself an independent MP, again the party has to work out what to do, and again she has to work out what she might do next – as her old political friend Jeremy Corbyn, himself outside the Labour Party, works to set up a new party on the left.