Mr Corbyn said the scale of the problem had been "dramatically overstated".
Well that's all cleared up then.
Worth pointing out that he didn't say the
report overstated the problem: the worst he's said about the report is "
While I do not accept all of its findings, I trust its recommendations will be swiftly implemented to help move on from this period."
Given that the Labour Party was widely described as a threat to Jewish safety, as institutionally antisemitic and so on, it's simply undeniable that the problem was overstated. I haven't read the report yet but by all accounts it doesn't support any of the wilder claims, so it's not unreasonable that Corbyn would feel at least somewhat vindicated, especially given what he personally was accused of.
What's odd, if also predictable, is that the report is being reported as if it
did confirm the wilder allegations. What it does confirm is bad enough, you'd have thought, but apparently not bad enough for many. Corbyn's suspension serves a useful purpose then, in that it's what you'd expect to happen if the report
had confirmed everything that's been said over the last few years.
Anyway you have to ask yourself if it's good that in order to avoid being suspended from the party, members are expected to state publicly that something everybody knows happened - real problems within the party were exploited for factional purposes - definitely did not happen.
While it's happening to the former leader. I mean, is that a good place to start, if you're trying to fight antisemitism?