A Conservative party advert attacking Jeremy Corbyn’s record features a string of claims about the Labour leader’s policy positions. But are they fair? A Guardian analysis shows several of the remarks attributed to Corbyn have been taken out of context – although others more accurately reflect his views.
Here are the nine clips and the longer footage from which the Conservatives took them.
1. ‘I’ve been involved in opposing anti-terror legislation ever since I first went into parliament in 1983’
Context: This was taken from a speech given at the Stop the War Coalition conference in 2011. In it he claims that a “growing sense of Islamophobia, the growth of anti-terror legislation” are a threat to national security.
Analysis: The use of this clip seems fair and in context.
2. ‘Close down Nato’
Context: This was taken from a speech he gave at a demonstration in Newport, Wales, in 2014 in which he criticised Nato’s expansionism and argued that it should have been replaced after the cold war by the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe, which has members on either side of the former iron curtain.
He said: “Why don’t we turn it around, close down Nato, invest in people, invest in peace, invest in jobs, invest in hope, not create the intolerance and detestation that is led by wars and leads also to racism and intolerance in our own society?”
Analysis: This is completely stripped of the context of Corbyn’s wider argument.
3. ‘I am against the replacement of Trident’
Context: This was taken from a 2015 Labour leadership hustings in which he said: “Nothing that’s happened in the past 15 years has been solved or aided by having nuclear weapons. I am against the replacement of Trident and the nuclear missile system that goes with it. It will cost us £100bn. I would much rather that money was spent on investing in high technology industry, investing in engineering and using those brilliant skills to make other things other than nuclear weapons.”
Analysis: This lacks the context of Corbyn’s concern about cost or his scepticism as to its effectiveness for peacekeeping.
4. ‘I’m not happy with the shoot-to-kill policy’
Context: This was taken from a BBC interview in November 2015. He said: “I am not happy with the shoot-to-kill policy in general. I think that is quite dangerous and I think it can often be counterproductive. I think you have to have security which prevents people firing off weapons where you can and there are various degrees of doing things, as we know, but the idea you end up with a war on the streets is not a good thing. Surely you have to work to try and prevent these things happening. That has got to be the priority.”
Analysis: It lacks the context of his remarks in which he talks about the need for prevention of gun crime.
5. ‘Abolish their army’
Context: The full quote, from a speech at a Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament gathering in August 2012, was: “Wouldn’t it be wonderful if every politician around the world, instead of taking pride in the size of their armed forces, did what the people of Costa Rica have done and abolished their army and took pride in the fact they don’t have an army and that their country is near the top of the global peace index?”
Analysis: This is the most highly edited of the quotes and makes the least sense out of context.
6. Corbyn: ‘Fight all the cuts, except those in the armed forces, where we want to see a few more cuts taking place and no more nuclear weapons’
Context: An aside by Corbyn at a Stop the Cuts rally in October 2010.
Analysis: This seems to be a fair rendition.
7. ‘Friends from Hezbollah, friends from Hamas’
Context: Corbyn said: “Tomorrow evening it will be my pleasure and my honour to host an event in parliament where our friends from Hezbollah will be speaking. I have also invited friends from Hamas to come and speak as well. Unfortunately, the Israelis would not allow them to travel here, so it is going to be only friends from Hezbollah. So far as I am concerned, that is absolutely the right function of using parliamentary facilities, to invite people from other parts of the world so that we can promote that peace, that understanding and that dialogue. And the idea that an organisation that is dedicated towards the good of the Palestinian people and bringing about long-term peace and social justice and political justice in the whole region should be labelled as a terrorist organisation by the British government is really a big, big historical mistake.”
Analysis: Many will feel uncomfortable or angry that he would describe proscribed terror organisations as “friends”. The context explained more about why he considered it right to engage with such people.
8. Comments on IRA bombing
Asked last month by Sophy Ridge on Sky News if he could “unequivocally condemn the IRA”, Corbyn said: “Look, bombing is wrong, all bombing is wrong. Of course I condemn it.” Ridge responded: “But you’re condemning all bombing, can you condemn the IRA without equating it to …” Corbyn said: “No.”
Context: While this clip appears to show Corbyn refusing to condemn the IRA, he goes on to say: “No, I think what you have to say is all bombing has to be condemned and you have to bring about a peace process. Listen, in the 1980s, Britain was looking for a military solution in Ireland – it clearly was never going to work. Ask anyone in the British army at the time … I condemn all the bombing by both the loyalists and the IRA.”
Analysis: As edited for the Tory attack ad, this clip seems misleading.
9. Failure to answer a question about the IRA
Over dramatic music, the attack ad ends with a BBC Ulster presenter Stephen Nolan asking Corbyn by phone: “Are you refusing to condemn what the IRA did?” and Corbyn saying he can’t hear before suggesting they do the interview later. The line then appears to go dead. The implication is clear that Corbyn won’t answer the difficult question.
Context: In fact he had tackled the question earlier in the interview, which went as follows:
JC: Look, I condemn what was done by the British army as well as by other sides as well. What happened in Derry in 1972 was pretty devastating as well.
SN: Do you distinguish between state forces, what the British army did, and the IRA?
JC: Well, in a sense the treatment of IRA prisoners which made them into virtual political prisoners suggested that the British government and the state saw some kind of almost equivalency. My point is that the whole violence issue was terrible, was appalling, and came out of a process that had been allowed to fester in Northern Ireland for a very long time and surely we can move on a bit and look towards the achievements of the peace process in moving things forward.
SN: But if you are a potential candidate for prime minister of the UK, Jeremy, it is fair for me to push you one more time. Are you prepared to condemn what the IRA did?
JC: No, what it is fair to push me on is how we take the peace process forward.
SN: Are you prepared to condemn what the IRA did?
JC: Can I answer the question in this way? We gained ceasefires – they were important and a huge step forward. Those ceasefires brought about the peace process, brought about a reconciliation process, which we should all be pleased about. Can we take the thing forward rather than backward?
Analysis: This is a misleading edit as it suggests he didn’t want to tackle the question at all.