George Galloway’s hopes of recruiting Jeremy Corbyn to his party have been dashed after sources close to the former Labour leader dismissed the idea he would join forces with the newly-elected MP for Rochdale.
Upon entering parliament last week following his controversial victory in the Rochdale by-election, Mr Galloway appealed to Mr Corbyn to “launch and lead” a new alliance of socialists and questioned why he had “procrastinated for so long” about his political future.
But sources close to Mr Corbyn – who remains suspended from the parliamentary Labour Party – have told Sky News Mr Galloway and Mr Corbyn working together was “never going to happen”.
A former aide told Sky News: “Galloway wants Jeremy to be the leader of some new great movement, but I don’t think Jeremy would do that. He doesn’t need Galloway’s baggage.”
They added: “George and Jeremy may have spoken at the same rallies during the Iraq war, but they have not ever been close comrades. George Galloway is a lone wolf – it’s how he operates.”
Another source branded the idea Mr Corbyn could join Mr Galloway’s Workers Party as a “complete non-starter”.
“They may agree over Gaza but they have totally different politics. It wouldn’t be in Jeremy’s interests.”
More on Jeremy Corbyn
Related Topics:
A spokesperson for Mr Corbyn declined to comment. Mr Galloway has been approached for comment.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:34
‘Keir Starmer, you’ll pay a high price’
Mr Galloway, a former Labour MP who was expelled from the party in 2003, won the Rochdale by-election last week on a pro-Gaza platform that earned him a majority of 5,697 votes.
Mr Galloway has been strongly critical of Sir Keir Starmer’s position on the conflict, accusing him in his victory speech of “enabling, encouraging and covering for the catastrophe presently going on in occupied Palestine in the Gaza strip”.
He claimed his election was going to “spark a movement, a landslide, a shifting of the tectonic plates in scores of parliamentary constituencies”.
Shortly before he was sworn in as an MP in the Commons, Mr Galloway urged Mr Corbyn to make a “final total break with Labour” in an interview with the left-leaning YouTube channel Not the Andrew Marr Show.
He admitted he had not spoken with Mr Corbyn in “many years” and said he did not know why “he has procrastinated so long in making a final total break with Labour and leading something himself.”
“If he was here now, I would say to him, ‘You saw what happened [in Rochdale]. Set up, announce an alliance of the remaining socialists in the country. You lead it, I’ll support it, you’ll be the leader, and let’s go. Time is running out.'”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:09
‘If you slap me I will slap you back’
He added: “He must avoid being a wasting asset. He is a very considerable asset and everyone loves him. But he should be careful that he doesn’t waste the remaining opportunity that he has.
“If he won’t, we will run ourselves – we’ll support independence where we don’t run ourselves, and we’ll do that, but we will be weaker because of the absence of Jeremy Corbyn at the head of it.”
One Labour MP said they believed Mr Galloway had “ulterior motives” in asking Mr Corbyn to join his party – something they said the latter would be “stupid to do”.
“He’s set Corbyn a challenge he know he won’t be able to step up to,” they explained.
“He’s trying to make Jeremy an offer he can’t refuse and if he doesn’t take up that offer, I think Galloway will make out that Corbyn is the problem. Galloway wants to be the big boy of the left, he wants Jeremy’s 2.5m followers on social media.
“He wants to be the kingmaker of the left – but Galloway is for Galloway and nothing else.”
Sir Keir Starmer has insisted the “vast majority of farmers” will not be affected by changes to Inheritance Tax (IHT) ahead of a protest outside parliament on Tuesday.
It follows Chancellor Rachel Reeves announcing a 20% inheritance tax that will apply to farms worth more than £1m from April 2026, where they were previously exempt.
But the prime minister looked to quell fears as he resisted calls to change course.
Speaking from the G20 summit in Brazil, he said: “If you take a typical case of a couple wanting to pass a family farm down to one of their children, which would be a very typical example, with all of the thresholds in place, that’s £3m before any inheritance tax is paid.”
The comments come as thousands of farmers, including celebrity farmer Jeremy Clarkson, are due to descend on Whitehall on Tuesday to protest the change.
And 1,800 more will take part in a “mass lobby” where members of the National Farmers’ Union (NFU) will meet their MPs in parliament to urge them to ask Ms Reeves to reconsider the policy.
Speaking to broadcasters, Sir Keir insisted the government is supportive of farmers, pointing to a £5bn investment announced for them in the budget.
Advertisement
He said: “I’m confident that the vast majority of farms and farmers will not be affected at all by that aspect of the budget.
“They will be affected by the £5bn that we’re putting into farming. And I’m very happy to work with farmers on that.”
Sir Keir’s spokesman made a similar argument earlier on Monday, saying the government expects 73% of farms to not be affected by the change.
Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs Secretary Steve Reed said only about 500 out of the UK’s 209,000 farms would be affected, according to Treasury calculations.
However, that number has been questioned by several farming groups and the Conservatives.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:28
Farming industry is feeling ‘betrayed’ – NFU boss
Government figures ‘misleading’
The NFU said the real number is about two-thirds, with its president Tom Bradshaw calling the government’s figures “misleading” and accusing it of not understanding the sector.
The Country Land and Business Association (CLA) said the policy could affect 70,000 farms.
Conservative shadow farming minister Robbie Moore accused the government last week of “regurgitating” figures that represent “past claimants of agricultural property relief, not combined with business property relief” because he said the Treasury does not have that data.
Agricultural property relief (APR) currently provides farmers 100% relief from paying inheritance tax on agricultural land or pasture used for rearing livestock or fish, and can include woodland and buildings, such as farmhouses, if they are necessary for that land to function.
Farmers can also claim business property relief (BPR), providing 50% or 100% relief on assets used by a trading business, which for farmers could include land, buildings, plant or machinery used by the business, farm shops and holiday cottages.
APR and BPR can often apply to the same asset, especially farmed land, but APR should be the priority, however BPR can be claimed in addition if APR does not cover the full value (e.g. if the land has development value above its agricultural value).
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Mr Moore said the Department for the Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and the Treasury have disagreed on how many farms will be impacted “by as much as 40%” due to the lack of data on farmers using BPR.
Lib Dem MP Tim Farron said last week1,400 farmers in Cumbria, where he is an MP, will be affected and will not be able to afford to pay the tax as many are on less than the minimum wage despite being asset rich.
A split is emerging in the cabinet, with Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson revealing she will join several of her colleagues and vote against the bill to legalise assisted dying.
Ms Phillipson told Sky News she will vote against the proposed legislation at the end of this month, which would give terminally ill people with six months to live the option to end their lives.
She voted against assisted dying in 2015 and said: “I haven’t changed my mind.
“I continue to think about this deeply. But my position hasn’t changed since 2015.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:41
Details of end of life bill released
MPs will be given a free vote on the bill, so they will not be told how to vote by their party.
The topic has seen a split in the cabinet – however, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has yet to reveal how he will vote on 29 November.
Ms Phillipson joins some other big names who have publicly said they are voting against the bill
These include Deputy PM Angela Rayner, Health Secretary Wes Streeting, Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood and Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds.
Advertisement
Border security minister Angela Eagle is also voting against the bill.
Senior cabinet members voting in favour of assisted dying include Energy Secretary Ed Miliband, Science Secretary Peter Kyle, Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall, Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy, Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn, Transport Secretary Louise Haigh and Welsh Secretary Jo Stevens.
The split over the issue is said to be causing friction within government, with Sir Keir rebuking the health secretary for repeatedly saying he is against the bill and for ordering officials to review the costs of implementing any changes in the law.
Sky News’ deputy political editor Sam Coates has been told Morgan McSweeney, the PM’s chief of staff, is concerned about the politics of the bill passing.
He is understood to be worried the issue will dominate the agenda next year and, while he is not taking a view on the bill, he can see it taking over the national conversation and distracting from core government priorities like the economy and borders.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Details of the bill were published last week and include people wanting to end their life having to self-administer the medicine.
It would only be allowed for terminally ill people who have been given six months to live.
Two independent doctors would have to confirm a patient is eligible for assisted dying and a High Court judge would have to give their approval before it could go ahead.