What was the point of the meeting that Board of Deputies' president Jonathan Arkush recently had with Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn?

From the Board's point of view, everything that was discussed could have been incorporated in an open letter. The assurances Corbyn is reported to have given at the meeting, relating to religious slaughter, circumcision and faith schools (not to mention his reported firm commitment to the continued existence of the state of Israel within secure and recognised boundaries), could easily have been given in writing. Indeed, given the present state of Labour politics, it might have been safer all round had these matters been raised in hard copy, and had the assurances said to have been uttered by Corbyn been put on the record at the outset.

Perhaps I'm worrying unnecessarily. Perhaps, following the meeting, Arkush did take the precaution of writing a short thank-you note, mentioning the warm words of comfort Corbyn is said to have offered on matters of central importance to the overwhelming majority of Jews in this country. In which case, the thank-you note itself needs to be put in the public domain. Meanwhile, all we have to go on are the 500 or so words penned by Arkush and published in last week's JC. On certain key matters this report is far from reassuring. "We were [says Arkush] less than satisfied by what he [Corbyn] said on his past meetings with extremists and terrorists, and by his reluctance to come out solidly against boycotts of Israel. … While we asked Mr Corbyn at least to acknowledge and draw a line under associations with people we perceive to be terrorists and antisemites, he said he only committed himself to 'reflect further' on such associations - an attitude we consider inadequate."

This is not good news. What we need to grasp is that, as far as Jewish people are concerned, Mr Corbyn is not a new type of Labour leader. Rather, in electing him, Labour has reverted to type. Embedded within the narrative of the British Labour movement there is a long history of anti-Jewish prejudice. This prejudice - more often than not expressed through a form of genteel bigotry - predated Zionism. It was grounded in the preoccupation with Jews as having had a prime responsibility for the development and promotion of an amoral industrial capitalism, condemning rich Jews as bloodsucking capitalists while poor Jews were castigated because - it was alleged - they took work from native Britons and drove down wage levels.

The contempt shown for Jewish suffering by Beatrice Webb - one of the founding architects of the Labour Party - is well known. "I can't understand why the Jews make such a fuss over a few dozen of their people killed in Palestine," she lectured Chaim Weizmann after the massacre of 67 Jews by Palestinian Arabs in Hebron in 1929.

This effortless condescension found its echo in the public contempt of Ernest Bevin for Holocaust survivors, but also in the private if well-mannered sneering of his boss, Clement Attlee (I have this on the authority of the late Manny Shinwell, also a member of Attlee's cabinet). It unquestionably resonates today in the cynical mésalliance between the left and Islamic fundamentalists.

I regard Tony Blair and Harold Wilson as the only truly philosemitic Labour leaders. That's not to say that I regard every other Labour leader as an antisemite. I don't.

We're assured that at his meeting with Mr Arkush Mr Corbyn condemned antisemitism "from any part of the political spectrum." But his past associations - which he is clearly not inclined (or at least not yet inclined) to disown - paint a different picture.

Which brings us to ask why Corbyn agreed to meet Arkush. Whatever else he is, Corbyn is nobody's fool. He must know that his close association with Ken Livingstone is bound to react adversely on the chances of Labour's Sadiq Khan succeeding Boris Johnson as mayor of London. Fences need to be mended. Damage needs to be repaired.

We are told that a second meeting between Corbyn and Arkush has been pencilled in. At that encounter, Arkush must ensure that the Labour leader gives him - and us - the further, unambiguous reassurances to which British Jewry is entitled.