Jeremy Corbyn may dismiss ‘disloyal’ shadow ministers in New Year reshuffle

Who can blame him if he does?

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn is planning to reshuffle his Shadow Cabinet in the first week of January – with aides pencilling in an announcement for as early as 4 January. Mr Corbyn wants to assert his authority by dismissing “disloyal” shadow ministers who have openly defied his leadership and questioned whether he will remain in the post until 2020.

He is understood to have made the “seismic” decision to move shadow Foreign Secretary Hilary Benn, but will have to withstand furious resistance if he is to force it through. Defence spokeswoman Maria Eagle, her sister Angela – the shadow First Secretary of State – and the chief whip, Rosie Winterton, are also on the brink of being demoted.

Source: Jeremy Corbyn to dismiss ‘disloyal’ shadow ministers in New Year reshuffle | UK Politics | News | The Independent

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:


17 thoughts on “Jeremy Corbyn may dismiss ‘disloyal’ shadow ministers in New Year reshuffle

  1. Terry Davies

    hilary Benn should resign there is no gain for the labour party in retaining him in the shadow cabinet. his ill thought out decisions make him a liability.

  2. daijohn

    Corbyn is the Leader of the Labour Party. Cabinet reshuffles are something that all leaders do. Too many members of the shadow cabinet are putting their heads above the parapet and deserve the consequences.

  3. Josef K

    I think he may have appointed them under the old guise of keep your friends close but your enemies closer, unfortunately he is playing Queensbury rules with a bunch of cowardly thugs who obey no rules of decency at all.
    He needs a united shadow cabinet, not one where he cannot turn his back on them in fear of getting stabbed in it. There are enough decent newcomers to choose from who are “old” Labour in their outlook and with real life experience. Give them a run out and send some real warning shots to the Tories in labour clothing, let them know their days are numbered.

  4. John

    When I first saw this one from (at least) The Independent, I put it down to wild speculation by the media again. But if it does turn out to be true, then isn’t this going to be a bit embarrassing for Corbyn? I say this because I remember Corbyn in an interview saying that he wanted a variety of views across the party, and he knew what Maria Eagles views on e.g. Trident were, BEFORE he gave her the position he gave her. Now, let’s assume for a moment that he also knew what Benns views were on Syria. If he does move these people, doesn’t it prove that his idea has sort of backfired? (although I should also add that I remember him saying that he was going to try to persuade certain people to his POV). Until either yourself Mike (or someone else) explains where I’m possibly going wrong on this one, I’m going to assume that this could be very tricky for him?

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      My understanding was that, like Abraham Lincoln, he wanted an inclusive “team of rivals”, so he would have the advantage of hearing many viewpoints before coming to a decision on any political point.
      After that decision is reached, however, his shadow cabinet would have collective responsibility for it, and that is where people like Mr Benn and Ms Eagle have let themselves down.

    2. Lee Hyde

      “…let’s assume for a moment that he also knew what Benns views were on Syria”

      Seems unlikely, given that Benn was (at least publicly) espousing a position approximate to Corbyn’s mere day’s before the vote.

  5. Mr.Angry

    I truly wish him luck, sick to death of the Blairities, twisted Tories engaged within the Labour party,

  6. AndyH

    Good for him, some of his front bench team have been shamelessly whoring for the leadership and/or moonlighting for the Conservatives.

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      You fail to take into account the reasons for those particular acts.
      Take a look at his rebellions and you’ll see that he was right to do so.
      It casts your comment in a very different light!

      1. mohandeer

        Blair never entertained anyone who disagreed with him, that is why they were called his cronies. not so with Jeremy who wanted to hear all views even those contrary to his own, but outright defiance of the people they represent and that was a huge majority, is exactly the very best reason to get shot of them. He doesn’t want yes men (and Tom Watson is decidedly not, but may still prove to be a good deputy) but he does want ministers willing to accept the views of the masses who they are supposed to represent.

    2. Lee Hyde

      He’ll be sacking them as shadow cabinet ministers, not MPs. As a serial rebel Corbyn accepted the cost (i.e. no cabinet posts) for 30+ years. There’s nothing hypocritical about expecting his fellow MPs to accept the same conditions (Want to rebel? Do it from the back benches) if they sow disunity or under-perform.

Comments are closed.