Labour candidate ‘wrong’ to say Israel allowed 7 October attack
Labour’s by-election candidate in Rochdale was “completely wrong” to say Israel deliberately allowed the 7 October massacre to give it the “green light” to invade Gaza, the party’s UK campaign coordinator has said.
Speaking to Sky News’ Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips, senior shadow frontbencher Pat McFadden pointed out Azhar Ali had issued a full apology and retraction and hoped he “learns a good lesson from it”.
Mr Ali had also criticised Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer over his approach to the Israel-Hamas conflict.
Politics latest: Gove says Starmer is ‘the jellyfish of British politics’
The row erupted after the Lancashire county councillor’s comments were published by The Mail On Sunday newspaper.
His remarks have been branded “warped” and “disgraceful” by the Jewish community, which fears they could further fuel hostility.
It will also be seized on by political opponents as evidence that Sir Keir has failed to change Labour since Jeremy Corbyn, when the party was embroiled in an antisemitism controversy.
Mr McFadden said of Mr Ali: “His comments were completely wrong. He should never have said something like that.
“He’s issued a complete apology and retraction and I hope he learns a good lesson from it because he should never have said something like that in the first place.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
‘I hope he learns a good lesson from it’
Mr Ali made his comments at a meeting of the Lancashire Labour Party in the wake of the October atrocity, where he claimed the Israeli government had removed its border security to enable the Hamas attack.
He said: “The Egyptians are saying that they warned Israel ten days earlier… Americans warned them a day before [that] there’s something happening… They deliberately took the security off, they allowed… that massacre that gives them the green light to do whatever they bloody want.”
After someone suggested Sir Keir was “held in high regard”, Mr Ali replied: “Can I disagree with you… A lot of the MPs I’ve spoken to, non-Muslim MPs, feel that on this issue, he’s lost the confidence of the parliamentary party.”
Read more on Sky News:
Defence secretary ‘furious’ as he orders review of MoD diversity and inclusivity policy
PM promises to reward hard work with tax cuts
After his remarks were made public, Mr Ali said in a statement: “I apologise unreservedly to the Jewish community for my comments which were deeply offensive, ignorant, and false.
“Hamas’s horrific terror attack was the responsibility of Hamas alone, and they are still holding hostages who must be released.
“7 October was the greatest loss of Jewish life in a single day since the Holocaust, and Jews in the UK and across the world are living in fear of rising antisemitism.
“I will urgently apologise to Jewish leaders for my inexcusable comments.
“The Labour Party has changed unrecognisably under Keir Starmer’s leadership, he has my full support in delivering the change Britain needs.”
Comments aren’t about by-election – but Starmer’s decision-making
While the row over Azhar Ali may be connected to the upcoming Rochdale by-election, it’s really a story about Sir Keir Stamer and his ability to make difficult political decisions.
No one is disputing Mr Ali did say that Israel allowed the 7 October attacks to take place. No one – including Mr Ali himself – is disputing those remarks were ignorant, false and offensive. And yet, he remains Labour’s candidate.
Part of the explanation for that is technical. It’s now too late for Labour to swap in someone else with the official deadline having elapsed days ago. So he will be on the ballot paper.
The question for Sir Keir is whether the party disavows their candidate, stops campaigning for him in Rochdale, and makes it clear he would not sit as a Labour MP if he did win the vote.
The Jewish Representative Council of Greater Manchester & Region said it had met Mr Ali and been reassured by his “long track record of interfaith work and combatting extremism”, but had been “shocked and appalled” about his remarks on the Hamas attack, which it said demonstrated “warped thinking”.
‘Unforgivable’
The Board of Deputies of British Jews said in a statement: “These comments are disgraceful and unforgivable.
“It is clear to us that Mr Ali is not apologising out of a genuine sense of remorse.”
Karen Pollock, chief executive of the Holocaust Educational Trust, wrote on social media: “Outrageous, highly offensive, mad and unacceptable.”
Click to subscribe to Politics at Jack and Sam’s wherever you get your podcasts
Conservative Party chairman Richard Holden said: “Time after time, Sir Keir Starmer says that he’s changed Labour. Time after time we’re seeing that simply isn’t true.
“While vile racist slurs are freely exchanged within Sir Keir Starmer’s Labour Party, it is unfit to hold public office.”
Gawain Towler, a spokesman for Reform UK, said: “I find it absolutely extraordinary that Labour frontbenchers are being sent out to work for this guy, knowing his comments, which are worse than anything people have been suspended for.
“The only thing I can think of is they are terrified of George Galloway so they are trying to out-extreme him. It is truly shocking.”
A spokesman for the Workers Party of Britain said: “Mr Ali has described his own words and views as ‘stupid, ignorant, offensive and false’. Why should anyone vote for him then?”
“Our election slogan is ‘For Gaza. For Rochdale’. We are unapologetically pro-Gaza, pro-Palestine. And it is that message which resonates across Rochdale: young and old, white and black.”
Mr Ali, a former government adviser who was made an OBE in 2020 for public service, was selected last month to contest the poll, caused by the death of Sir Tony Lloyd.
He is defending a Labour majority of more than 9,000.
The Liberal Democrats have been asked for comment.
See below the full list of candidates and the political parties they represent:
Azhar Ali, Labour Party
Mark Coleman, Independent
Simon Danczuk, Reform UK
Iain Donaldson, Liberal Democrats
Paul Ellison, The Conservative Party Candidate
George Galloway, Workers Party of Britain
Michael Howarth, Independent
William Howarth, Independent
Guy Otten, Green Party
Ravin Subortna, The Official Monster Raving Loony Party
David Tully, Independent
The government has published witness statements submitted by a senior official connected to the collapse of a trial involving two men accused of spying for China.
Here are three big questions that flow from them:
1. Why weren’t these statements enough for the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to carry on with the trial?
For this prosecution to go ahead, the CPS needed evidence that China was a “threat to national security”.
The deputy national security adviser Matthew Collins doesn’t explicitly use this form of words in his evidence. But he comes pretty close.
Politics latest – follow live
In the February 2025 witness statement, he calls China “the biggest state-based threat to the UK’s economic security”.
Six months later, he says China’s espionage operations “harm the interests and security of the UK”.
Yes, he does quote the language of the Tory government at the time of the alleged offences, naming China as an “epoch-defining and systemic challenge”.
But he also provides examples of malicious cyber activity and the targeting of individuals in government during the two-year period that the alleged Chinese spies are said to have been operating.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Witness statements published in China spy trial
In short, you can see why some MPs and ex-security chiefs are wondering why this wasn’t enough.
Former MI6 head Sir Richard Dearlove told Sky News this morning that “it seems to be there was enough” and added that the CPS could have called other witnesses – such as sitting intelligence directors – to back up the claim that China was a threat.
Expect the current director of public prosecutions (DPP) Stephen Parkinson to be called before MPs to answer all these questions.
2. Why didn’t the government give the CPS the extra evidence it needed?
The DPP, Stephen Parkinson, spoke to senior MPs yesterday and apparently told them he had 95% of the evidence he needed to bring the case.
The government has said it’s for the DPP to explain what that extra 5% was.
He’s already said the missing link was that he needed evidence to show China was a “threat to national security”, and the government did not give him that.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
What does China spy row involve?
The newly published witness statements show they came close.
But if what was needed was that explicit form of words, why was the government reticent to jump through that hoop?
The defence from ministers is that the previous Conservative administration defined China as a “challenge”, rather than a “threat” (despite the numerous examples from the time of China being a threat).
The attack from the Tories is that Labour is seeking closer economic ties with China and so didn’t want to brand them an explicit threat.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Is China an enemy to the UK?
3. Why do these statements contain current Labour policy?
Sir Keir Starmer says the key reason for the collapse of this trial is the position held by the previous Tory government on China.
But the witness statements from Matthew Collins do contain explicit references to current Labour policy. The most eye-catching is the final paragraph of the third witness statement provided by the Deputy National Security Adviser, where he quotes directly from Labour’s 2024 manifesto.
He writes: “It is important for me to emphasise… the government’s position is that we will co-operate where we can; compete where we need to; and challenge where we must, including on issues of national security.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
In full: Starmer and Badenoch clash over China spy trial
Did these warmer words towards China influence the DPP’s decision to drop the case?
Why did Matthew Collins feel it so important to include this statement?
Was he simply covering his back by inserting the current government’s approach, or was he instructed to put this section in?
A complicated relationship
Everyone agrees that the UK-China relationship is a complicated one.
There is ample evidence to suggest that China poses a threat to the UK’s national security. But that doesn’t mean the government here shouldn’t try and work with the country economically and on issues like climate change.
It appears the multi-faceted nature of these links struggled to fit the legal specificity required to bring a successful prosecution.
But there are still plenty of questions about why the government and the CPS weren’t able or willing to do more to square these circles.
The Trump family’s crypto ventures have generated over $1 billion in profit, led by World Liberty Financial and memecoins including TRUMP and MELANIA.
SEC Chair Paul Atkins said the US is a decade behind on crypto and that building a regulatory framework to attract innovation is “job one” for the agency.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports2 years agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports3 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment1 year agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024