DUDLEY North MP Ian Austin could face disciplinary action after he criticised Labour’s policy on anti-Semitism and accused Jeremy Corbyn of “supporting and defending” extremists.

The MP questioned Mr Corbyn’s suitability to lead the party, days after Dame Margaret Hodge admitted confronting him over the controversy of its rules on racism targeted at Jews.

Mr Austin, the son of adoptive Jewish parents, said he was “deeply ashamed” of Labour for not fully adopting a widely-backed definition of anti-Semitism, set out by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA).

He spoke out after being told that like Dame Margaret, he is facing possible disciplinary action.

Mr Austin admitted clashing with party chairman Ian Lavery over the IHRA definition but said it was just a “heated discussion”, and claims he “screamed abuse were false”.

He accused Mr Corbyn of introducing to Labour a more “extreme” brand of politics, telling BBC Radio 4’s The World This Weekend: “Somebody with views and history like his isn’t really suited to the leadership of a mainstream political party.”

Asked whether he was speaking out just because he did not want Mr Corbyn to lead the party, Mr Austin said: “He was never my choice to lead the Labour Party, that’s true, but what do people think? That I’m so worried about his plans to nationalise the railways or something that I would invent all this stuff?

“It’s actually the other way around. It’s because he has spent his entire time in politics on the extreme fringes of the Labour Party, supporting and defending all sorts of extremists and in some cases frankly, anti-Semites.”

He added that he had joined Labour to fight racism after he “grew up listening to my dad tell me how he’d escaped from the Holocaust and how his mum and sisters were murdered in Treblinka (concentration camp)”.

In an op-ed for today’s Guardian, Mr Austin added that “a minority of people” under Mr Corbyn’s leadership “go way beyond legitimate and passionately held views about the plight of the Palestinians and tip over into anti-Semitism”.

He added: “But for others it is much more fundamental, whether it is Ken Livingstone’s nonsense about Adolf Hitler, legitimising the myth that Jews were the chief financiers of the slave trade, or outrageous comparisons between the actions of Israel and the crimes of the Nazis.

“Jewish MPs – particularly women – have been subjected to the most horrendous abuse.”

Labour’s governing National Executive Committee (NEC) did not include within its new code of conduct the full definition of anti-Semitism – including illustrative examples – set out by the IHRA.

While the code explicitly endorses the IHRA’s working definition of anti-Semitism and lists of behaviours likely to be regarded as anti-Semitic word-for-word from the international organisation’s own document, it omits four examples:

– Accusing Jewish people of being more loyal to Israel than their home country;

– Claiming that Israel’s existence as a state is a racist endeavour;

– Requiring higher standards of behaviour from Israel than other nations; and

– Comparing contemporary Israeli policies to those of the Nazis.

Labour insisted the examples are covered in the new code.

A Labour spokesman said Mr Corbyn and the party were “fully committed to the support, defence and celebration of the Jewish community and its organisation”.

He added: “The NEC has concerns about one half of one of the IHRA’s 11 examples, which could be used to deny Palestinians, including Palestinian citizens of Israel and their supporters, their rights and freedoms to describe the discrimination and injustices they face in the language they deem appropriate.

“We understand the strong concerns raised in the Jewish community and are seeking to engage with communal organisations to build trust and confidence in our party.”