I mean there's this:
Shadow railways minister and Slough MP Tan Dhesi said he had planned to vote against the bill but was persuaded by Starmer tonight to abstain instead. Dhesi said he was “impressed” by the “detailed response” offered.
“I trust his experience, as well as the integrity with which he put the message across,” Dhesi told LabourList, concluding: “I’d rather have things on statute whereby the police or undercover agencies would be held to account by the ISC and lawmakers.”s
But as I wasn't in the call, who knows what was said? In that Twitter thread some reference is made to the Human Rights Act dealing with the issues and dangers of the new act instead.
What comes over to me in this is that he's got a legal mind and all the nuance involved with that - and how this is very different from the populist stances taken by his enemies (in the party and outside it). Buuuuuutt... there's issues here around clarity of communication. As you know, I'm inclined to defend him but can't really see that I've got any basis for doing so here.