Anas Sarwar has dismissed any difference between him and Sir Keir Starmer over a ceasefire in Gaza as “semantics.”
The Scottish Labour leader moved to downplay the differences ahead of the party’s conference in Glagsow where delegates are expected to back an immediate ceasefire in the Israel-Hamas war.
Sir Keir has always stopped short of using the word “immediate”, rather calling for a “sustainable” ceasefire.
READ MORE: Jackie Bailie in Gaza ceasefire call ahead of Labour conference
Speaking to the BBC’s Good Morning Scotland, Mr Sarwar said: “I don’t actually think there’s as much distance in this as people now believe.
“Keir Starmer in recent days has said he wants the fighting to stop right now and for that to be a sustainable ceasefire.”
He said they both wanted the violence in the Palestinian enclave to stop “right now” along with the delivery of humanitarian aid, the release of Israeli hostages.
Mr Sarwar said: “We shouldn’t be stuck on the semantics because this is a really important issue of life and death for people right now in Gaza and in Israel.
“The idea that this is about the semantics within one political party that’s in opposition…”
Pressed on why Sir Keir had not used the phrase “immediate ceasefire”, Mr Sarwar said: “Keir Starmer has said ‘the immediate end to fighting’, which means a sustainable ceasefire.
“I am perfectly relaxed and happy to say we need an immediate ceasefire and I have been saying so for weeks and weeks on end.”
READ MORE: Flynn pleads with Sunak and Starmer to call for Gaza ceasefire
The party leader also said “open conversations” were happening with Labour’s two Scottish MPs, Ian Murray and Michael Shanks, ahead of an SNP vote on a ceasefire in the Commons this week.
When they forced a similar vote in the Commons in November, it caused splits in the Parliamentary Labour Party, with 56 MPs defying Sir Keir, including 10 shadow ministers and aides.
However, Mr Murray and Mr Shanks voted with the party whip.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel