Labour leader says suggestion he would be ‘absolutely fine’ with another referendum is down to ‘mischievous misreporting’

This article is more than 3 years old

This article is more than 3 years old

Jeremy Corbyn has denied supporting a second Scottish independence referendum, claiming that “mischievous misreporting” had twisted his words.



Corbyn received a furious response from parts of the Scottish Labour party after saying on Saturday he was “absolutely fine” with the idea of a new referendum taking place.

“If a referendum is held then it is absolutely fine, it should be held,” he said. “I don’t think it’s the job of Westminster or the Labour party to prevent people holding referenda.”

The Scottish Labour leader, Kezia Dugdale, made it clear she opposed this, while Jackie Baillie, a Labour member of the Scottish parliament called the comments “an insult”.

Corbyn clarifies his position on second Scottish independence referendum, saying he's opposed - Politics live Read more

Asked about the issue on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, the Labour leader said his views had been misrepresented. “No, we’re not in favour of a referendum,” he said. “There was a bit of mischievous misreporting going on there.

“I was asked if, in Westminster, we would block the holding of a referendum. I said: ‘No, if the Scottish parliament decided they wanted to have a referendum, then that would be wrong for Westminster to block it.’



“But just to be absolutely clear, I do not think there should be another referendum. I think that independence would be catastrophic for many people in Scotland.

“It would lead to a sort of turbo-charged austerity with the levels of income the government has in Scotland because there’s a very low oil price and the high dependency on oil tax income.”

Asked about Baillie’s response, Corbyn said: “When she made those comments I suspect she had not heard what I had actually said and the statement I had put out afterwards. There is no ambiguity whatsoever. And those that are seeking mischief had better go and seek it elsewhere.”

His comments brought a critical response from the Press Association, which conducted Corbyn’s initial interview about a referendum at the weekend.

The news agency carried a full transcript of the Labour leader’s words at the time, which explained that any future referendum should take place “in the context of the economic relationship with the rest of the UK and the question of devolution of EU powers to English regions and to Scotland”.

Peter Clifton, the Press Association’s editor-in-chief, said: “The only mischievous thing about this episode is the suggestion that PA has done anything beyond what it always does – accurately report what politicians say to us in an entirely impartial way.”

Elsewhere in the Today interview, Corbyn brushed off criticism that his response to Philip Hammond’s budget speech in parliament had not properly dealt with the most controversial element, a rise in national insurance contributions for self-employed people.

“No, I did raise the issue of the self-employed,” he said. “I also wanted to set out in that speech the reality of life in Britain today.”

Asked about a policy idea he had floated earlier in the year, calling for maximum wage levels for the highest earners, Corbyn said he now thought imposing maximum pay ratios within companies was “probably a more effective way of doing it”.

“We’ve been looking at that and thinking about it, and talking to a lot of people about it,” he said.

“I’m looking at pay-ratio levels within organisations and companies and I think that is a good way forward. That, in turn, would ensure or help to encourage the development of fairer pay within companies.”

Challenged about his own and Labour’s continued poor opinion poll ratings, Corbyn blamed the tone of the media debate. “We will be doing better, don’t you worry about that,” he said.

“One day we’ll get into media discussions and debates which are about inequality and injustice in society – as you’ve kindly allowed me to do this morning – rather than political process, which absorbs itself into the mindset of a media world rather than world of poverty and injustice in our society.”