Jeremy corbyn

The Commons Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport recently investigated claims of Russian interference in the UK electoral process. The committee might soon be forced to go one further and investigate EU interference in our political system.  How remarkable that today’s ‘legally-binding’ document from Michel Barnier, which tries to keep Northern Ireland in a customs union with the EU comes just 48 hours after Jeremy Corbyn made a speech changing Labour’s policy in order to commit the UK as a whole to remain within the customs union. I am not party to any conversations Jeremy Corbyn might have had with Michel Barnier or his team, but the Labour leader couldn’t have done better to create the impression of collusion between the two.

Yesterday, after Jeremy Corbyn's speech on Brexit, he moved on from press questions about the substance of his policy change to seeking non-media questions. It was presumably to show that Labour is more interested in the real questions of real people rather than the biased agenda of the press. That real question ended up being 'please will you hurry up and be our Prime Minister?' Corbynites would argue that even a question as pointless as this is better than the mocking tone that journalists take as they try to claim, on the basis of whispered gossip, that this is a result of some kind of Shadow Cabinet falling out. Why not focus on the real issues, they argue. But the problem is that politicians are the least able to gauge what a legitimate press question is.

Jeremy Corbyn’s speech today in which he confirmed that a Labour government would keep Britain in a Customs Union with the EU was about so much more than trade. It was about the future of the Labour party itself. It sent a clear message about what, and more importantly who, Labour is for these days. It confirmed that Labour has finally made its choice between which of its two, quite conflictual support bases it will represent in public life: the better-off ones, the middle-class ones, the Southern ones. This is what Labour’s cosying up to the idea of a Customs Union — which is a betrayal of Brexit, whatever Labourites say to the contrary — really tells us.

The Labour shadow cabinet have been out in full force on the airwaves this morning dropping heavy hints that Jeremy Corbyn will use a speech tomorrow to announce that his party backs the UK remaining in 'a' customs union  post-Brexit – which would mean the UK would be unable to strike its own free trade deals. Speaking on the Andrew Marr show, the shadow Brexit secretary said Labour's front bench was 'unanimous' in its backing for striking a new deal with the EU after Brexit that would see the UK leave the customs union but then negotiate a treaty that will 'do the work of the customs union'. Only Corbyn hasn't always been so keen on 'the work of the customs union'.

Oh dear. When the Sun reported this month that Jeremy Corbyn met with a Czech spy – posing as a diplomat – during the cold war, the story appeared to raise serious questions over the Labour leader's judgment. A spokesman for the Labour leader admitted he had met a diplomat, but said Corbyn had never knowingly talked to a spy. However, things took a turn for the obscure when former Czech intelligence officer Jan Sarkocy claimed that he met Corbyn and recruited him as an intelligence asset – a claim Labour dismissed as a 'ridiculous smear'. This denial wasn't enough to stop some Tories going on the offensive. Tory vice-chair Ben Bradley tweeted that Corbyn had 'sold British secrets to communist spies'.

It's fair to say that the Conservatives' attempts to use the allegations about Jeremy Corbyn's links with a Czechoslovakian spy have had mixed results. The high point came when Theresa May managed to produce a joke about blank cheques and Czechs at this week's Prime Minister's Questions, and everything else has been competing to be the low point, from Steve Baker's deeply awful interview on the Daily Politics, to Ben Bradley receiving a letter from Corbyn's lawyers. Perhaps there could have been a slightly less ham-fisted way of engaging with the story. Or perhaps it would be better for the Tory party's dignity, if nothing else, if it left these claims well alone.

Bit of a rum PMQs today. Jeremy Corbyn, who has always loathed the EU and now pretends to admire it, asked May about Brexit. May, who has always admired the EU and now pretends to loathe it, fobbed him off with glib sound-bites. ‘Take back control of our borders,’ ‘protect workers’ rights,’ and so on. Corbyn asked a long question about the Government’s ‘desired outcome’. He got a four-word answer: ‘A bespoke economic partnership.’ Mr Speaker decided that he should be the star-turn today. Perhaps he sought to wow a posse of French MPs who were witnessing the bun-fight from the gallery. Quelling an early outbreak of shouting, the Speaker got down from his high chair and delivered one his longest ever speeches. ‘Please!

What a convenient inconvenience the row about Jeremy Corbyn's links with a Czechoslovakian agent is for the Labour leader. While the allegations that he was an informant during the Cold War may well be the 'nonsense' that he claims they are (they certainly don't seem to correlate with anything released at the end of that period), the way a number of newspapers have covered them has given him an opportunity to launch an attack on the press. In what tabloids might term a 'bizarre video rant', Corbyn said the newspapers had 'gone a bit James Bond' with these 'smears', before warning the 'media barons' that 'change is coming'.

There are two competing theories about how the Soviet Union collapsed. One holds that Ronald Reagan's moral leadership against communism and bolstering of US defences weakened Moscow's will and buried them economically. The other contends that Mikhail Gorbachev's domestic reforms and wise diplomacy brought down the Iron Curtain in spite of the cowboy in the White House. We can now add a third hypothesis: Jeremy Corbyn did it. If the claims of a former Czechoslovakian agent are to be believed, the Labour leader was a paid informant for the secret police. That would certainly explain the devastating collapse of state socialism. Even the mighty Warsaw Pact could not have withstood the support of Jeremy Corbyn.

Although it's the Conservatives nowadays who are best known for in-fighting, this weekend we were offered a reminder of the divisions in Labour. At a meeting of the National Policy Forum (NPF), a row broke out between the Momentum contingent and the moderates. The subject of the row was – once again – Ann Black, the veteran activist who was ousted as chair of the Disputes Panel last month (and replaced with Corbyn favourite Christine Shawcroft) after the Corbynistas won a majority on the National Executive Committee. Black was expected to defeat union representative Andi Fox to be elected as chair of the policy forum, which sets Labour policy for future general elections. However, it appears Jeremy Corbyn’s allies had other ideas.