As I reported last week, there was outrage when Corbyn wrote to MPs
opposing air strikes without first informing the shadow cabinet (I'm told that my account of that meeting was also raised).
In advance of the meeting, Labour released a poll of members (based on an «initial sample» of 1,900) showing that 75 per cent opposed intervention, regarded by some as an attempt to bounce the party into
opposing air strikes,
Jeremy Corbyn has been unable to force through an official Labour party policy of
opposing air strikes in Syria.
According to the New Statesman, the only MPs still pushing for a policy of
opposing air strikes at the end of the meeting were Diane Abbott and Jon Trickett.
Corbyn had been planning to offer Labour MPs a free vote while asserting that party policy was to
oppose air strikes.
Not exact matches
In the first public «opinion poll taken of the Hungarian population, some 40 percent are
opposed to the NATO
air strikes against Serbia, and one can imagine the opposition to a ground invasion moving through Hungary itself.
[8] It's hard to see how this provides good reasons to
oppose military action, since eschewing
air strikes doesn't provide a credible long - term strategy either.
YouGov reports that the majority of Britons are in favour of
air strikes against IS, but are
opposed in nearly equal numbers to «putting boots on the ground.»
By five - to - one, those who voted for Mr Corbyn
oppose Britain taking part in
air strikes against Syria.
His intervention comes after the 66 Labour MPs who backed
air strikes in a vote last week, defying their leader who
opposes Western wars in the Middle East, have complained of online abuse.
«Those who were
opposed to
air strikes were absolutely certain that everyone in the Rhondda wanted me to vote against, and those in favour claimed everyone knew that those
opposed were just terrorist sympathisers.»