Conservatives criticized for targeting Labour leader’s Friday night family time amid antisemitism allegations

In a heated final stretch of the election campaign, Labour leader Keir Starmer faced criticism from the Conservative Party over his commitment to spending Friday evenings with his family, a tradition tied to his wife’s Jewish heritage. This attack, deemed insensitive and having antisemitic undertones by some, has sparked a significant backlash from Jewish figures and political commentators. As Prime Minister Rishi Sunak intensifies his campaign efforts, the criticism of Starmer has been labelled by many as a desperate tactic. The controversy highlights the tensions in an increasingly personal campaign, with accusations of religious insensitivity adding to the already charged political atmosphere.

The issue began when Starmer, during a radio interview, mentioned his intention to maintain a practice of reserving Friday evenings for family time, a routine that often involves participating in family prayers. Conservative campaigners quickly seized on this statement, portraying Starmer as a “part-time” leader. The Labour leader’s response emphasized the cultural significance of Friday evenings within Jewish traditions, noting that while he aspires to preserve this family time, it does not preclude him from fulfilling his professional duties when necessary. The backlash from senior Jewish figures and political allies underscores the perceived insensitivity of the Conservative attack, which has been described as dangerously close to antisemitism.

The Guardian

The Guardian reported extensively on the controversy surrounding Keir Starmer’s family time commitments. The article highlighted the Conservative Party’s criticism of Starmer’s comments about spending Friday evenings with his family, which is a practice tied to his wife’s Jewish heritage. The attack was seen by many as a desperate attempt to undermine Starmer’s image, especially given the timing so close to the election. 

Senior Jewish figures, including former Board of Deputies president Marie van der Zyl and antisemitism adviser John Mann, condemned the Tory strategy as insensitive and potentially harmful. Van der Zyl described the attack as “horribly stigmatising,” emphasizing the importance of Friday nights for many Jewish families. Mann, who serves as the government’s independent adviser on antisemitism, warned that targeting someone over religious observance was a dangerous move, likening it to attacking someone for observing Christian traditions on Sundays.

Starmer defended his stance, arguing that the criticism was laughably pathetic and a sign of Conservative desperation. He pointed out that he has often worked on Fridays and that his commitment to family time does not mean shirking responsibilities. Instead, it reflects an effort to balance personal and professional life, a principle he believes is important for any leader.

The Guardian’s coverage also included reactions from the broader Jewish community and political commentators. The consensus was that the Conservative attack was not only misguided but also highlighted a lack of understanding of cultural and religious practices. The paper noted that the controversy could backfire on the Tories, alienating voters who see the attack as a sign of insensitivity and poor judgment.

Furthermore, the article detailed the broader context of the campaign, with opinion polls showing a narrowing Labour lead but still predicting a significant majority for Starmer. The Conservative campaign’s focus on warning against a Labour “supermajority” was seen as an implicit acknowledgement of likely defeat. The Guardian concluded that the personal nature of the attack on Starmer, particularly in relation to his family’s religious practices, might have further damaged the Conservative’s already strained credibility.

The Telegraph

The Telegraph provided a detailed account of the Conservative Party’s attack on Keir Starmer and the subsequent backlash. The article emphasized that Starmer’s decision to spend Friday evenings with his family is rooted in the Jewish tradition of Shabbat, which is observed by his wife Victoria and her family. 

Starmer responded to the criticism by labelling it as bordering on hysterical, pointing out that family time is a universal value and that respecting religious practices should not be controversial. He highlighted the importance of Friday nights for his family, not only for religious reasons but also as a time for bonding and relaxation. This practice, he argued, made him a better leader and decision-maker.

The Telegraph also reported on comments from senior Jewish figures and political allies. Lord Mann, the government’s antisemitism adviser, called the Conservative attack dangerous and insidious, noting the cultural significance of Friday nights within the Jewish community. He compared it to the importance of Sundays for Christians, a day traditionally respected by not holding parliamentary sessions.

The article included reactions from other political figures, such as Wes Streeting, the shadow health secretary, who described the Tory attacks as a total disgrace. He argued that the criticism reflected the Conservative Party’s desperation and their willingness to scrape the bottom of the barrel in their campaign tactics.

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, while not directly repeating the claim that Starmer would be a “part-time prime minister,” emphasized the sacrifices required in public service. He suggested that the role of a prime minister involves constant work and decision-making, implying that setting aside any regular time for personal matters might be unrealistic.

The Telegraph’s coverage underscored the broader implications of the controversy, suggesting that it might alienate voters who value family time and respect for religious practices. The article concluded that the Conservative attack could be seen as a misstep, potentially damaging their standing with certain voter demographics and highlighting a lack of cultural sensitivity.

The Times of Israel

The Times of Israel focused on the reactions from Jewish leaders and the broader community to the Conservative Party’s criticism of Keir Starmer. The publication highlighted the strong condemnation from senior Jewish figures, who saw the attack as not only insensitive but also dangerously close to antisemitism.

Keir Starmer reiterated the importance of Friday nights for his family, explaining that this time is often used for family prayers, reflecting his wife’s Jewish heritage. He described the Conservative criticism as desperate and out of touch, emphasizing that his commitment to family time does not interfere with his professional responsibilities.

Lord Mann, the government’s antisemitism adviser, played a prominent role in the article, warning that the Conservative attack was insidious and harmful. He noted that religious observances, such as Shabbat for Jews and Sundays for Christians, should be respected and not politicized. Mann’s comments were supported by other senior Jewish figures, who saw the attack as a sign of ignorance and insensitivity.

The Times of Israel also highlighted the broader political context, noting that the Labour Party is widely expected to win the upcoming election. The controversy over Starmer’s family time commitments has added an unexpected dimension to the campaign, drawing attention to issues of religious tolerance and respect for cultural practices.

The publication’s coverage included reactions from within the Jewish community, with many expressing support for Starmer and condemnation of the Conservative Party’s tactics. The article suggested that the attack might backfire on the Tories, alienating voters who value religious and cultural traditions.

The Independent

The Independent covered the controversy with a focus on the backlash faced by the Conservative Party. The article detailed Keir Starmer’s comments about reserving Friday evenings for family time, a practice tied to his wife’s Jewish heritage. The Labour leader’s statement, made during an interview with Virgin Radio, was quickly seized upon by Conservative campaigners, who labelled him a “part-time prime minister.”

Starmer defended his position, explaining that his commitment to family time, especially on Friday nights, is an important tradition in his household. He emphasized that this practice does not prevent him from fulfilling his duties and that it makes him a better decision-maker. The Labour leader described the Conservative attack as laughably pathetic and a sign of desperation.

The Independent reported on the widespread condemnation of the Tory attack from senior Jewish figures and political commentators. Lord Mann, the government’s antisemitism adviser, described the criticism as dangerous and insidious, noting the cultural significance of Friday nights within the Jewish community. He warned that targeting someone over religious observance is a dangerous move and should be avoided.

The article included reactions from other political figures, such as Wes Streeting, the shadow health secretary, who called the attacks a total disgrace. He argued that the criticism reflected the Conservative Party’s desperation and their willingness to engage in negative campaigning.

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, while not directly repeating the claim that Starmer would avoid working after 6 pm on Fridays, emphasized the constant demands of the role of a prime minister. He suggested that public service involves sacrifices and continuous decision-making.

The Independent’s coverage highlighted the broader implications of the controversy, suggesting that the Conservative attack might alienate voters who respect religious and cultural traditions. The article concluded that the criticism of Starmer’s family time commitments could be seen as a misstep, potentially damaging the Conservative Party’s standing with certain voter demographics.