Would you vote for the Soubry/Umunna party?

[droodzilla]

Do you really think he’ll switch to demanding another referendum at this late stage? I’ll go buy a hat and eat it if he does! It is blindingly obvious that Corbyn is an ideological Brexiter and will go against the will of his party membership whenever it suits him. He appears happy to do it in the most snide, slimey and duplicitous manner imaginable too by allowing the window of opportunity to time out, just as May is with Brexit itself. Two peas in a pod. He is a remarkably small man.

Ignoring your usual toxic rhetoric, my honest answer is I don't know, but it's certainly not ruled out.

Suppose, for example, May is emboldened by yesterday's splintering of Labour and calls another snap election. If there were unambiguous evidence of a stable lead for Remain, it wouldn't surprise me if Labour offered a second referendum in its manifesto. The absolute top priority for most party members is a progressive Labour government so, if a second referendum offered the most direct route to that, I can't imagine Corbyn or anyone else would have the slightest hesitation about supporting one.

Likewise, the idea of passing (a variant of) May's deal subject to a referendum with a Remain option seems to be gaining traction, and I expect Corbyn would go along with it if the full weight of the Shadow Cabinet swung behind the idea. Personally, I'm nervous about this option because May's deal is really quite bad and I want to see it eliminated as a possibility before any referendum. But it's certainly a possible scenario.

Both of the above scenarios represent credible responses to sets of circumstances that might actually materialise.

 

[gavreid]

They might do that. Labour have talked about having a People's Vote after they get into power, although Brexit will still take place. In other words they'll allow us to decide which flavour of Brexit we want. Remain won't be on the menu.

I've no more idea than anyone else, what I am saying is don't jump to conclusions just yet.

 

[Paul Mc]

Why not just call Greg an anti-semite and be done with it? Your post is a good illustration of the dangers of accepting the IHRA definition without qualification: it inhibits reasonable critique of Israel's actions (even if, let's say for the sake of argument, the critique is mistaken) by conflating it with anti-semitism.

The critique of the AJ doc you link to is so ferociously partisan as to be almsot unreadable. IS there a single post on the site expressing sympathy for the Palestinians? For my part, I found the AJ doc to be somewhat over-egged (the "scary" music!) but I found parts of it genuinely concerning. However, I also commented on it at the time asking if the actions shown on camera differed from those of any other lobbying group so I hope my view of the affair is quite balanced.

The IHRA does not inhibit criticisms of Israel - that's an oft-told lie I'm afraid. Give me an example where that might be the case. And the AJ doc wasn't partisan? I have sympathy for the Palestinians and hope they achieve their own statehood in a two-state settlement. I also know that the LP is awash with people who's political identity (including the leader) is based on hostility to Zionism and Israel's existence. That is the root cause of the current problems.

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

Factor in that:

He and the LP *do not have a majority in the HoC*. So unless/until the Tories+DUP cease their current behaviour *nothing* JC or the LP do can affect the outcome.

Like it or not (and I, for one, don't!) our future is in the hands of the Tories+DUP. Whilst they stick together none of the rest of us can change what will happen.

<snip>

Like it or not, that's the reality.

The problem with this argument is that it presumes that all MPs vote, all of the time, and always vote along party lines.

In truth, they don’t, and members often abstain or even vote against Government motions sometimes. God knows, Corbyn of all MPs understands that back benchers don’t always support the party line. So why has there been little or no evidence of work to peel Tory remainers away and, even if not getting their support, getting them to abstain?

 

[Seanm]

There has been, but not from the press.

 

[Tony L]

Both of the above scenarios represent credible responses to sets of circumstances that might actually materialise.

I hope so, but I really don’t share your confidence. My suspicion is if Corbyn does ever get to that point it will be because the penny has dropped that supporting Brexit will lose Labour many seats and any chance of forming a government, not because he grasps he’s on the wrong side of the argument. It will be too late for those of us who have wanted to make the argument very forcefully for years anyway!

 

[droodzilla]

The IHRA does not inhibit criticisms of Israel - that's an oft-told lie I'm afraid. Give me an example where that might be the case. And the AJ doc wasn't partisan? I have sympathy for the Palestinians and hope they achieve their own statehood in a two-state settlement. I also know that the LP is awash with people who's political identity (including the leader) is based on hostility to Zionism and Israel's existence. That is the root cause of the current problems.

Your post illustrated the point about the IHRA definition. You all but labelled Greg an anti-semite for bringing up the AJ doc.

The AJ doc was partisan but it did not break any rules:

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...a-ntisemitism-expose-israeli-embassy-official

The article you linked to was off the scale in its rabid hostility.

Many Labour MPs (including Corbyn) oppose what Israel has done to the Palestinians. That does not make them anti-Semitic.

 

[droodzilla]

I hope so, but I really don’t share your confidence. My suspicion is if Corbyn does ever get to that point it will be because the penny has dropped that supporting Brexit will lose Labour many seats and any chance of forming a government, not because he grasps he’s on the wrong side of the argument. It will be too late for those of us who have wanted to make the argument very forcefully for years anyway!

I'm neither confident nor not-confident about either of the scenarios I described.

I don't care about what may or may not be going on in Corbyn's head. It's pointless to speculate.

I do care about how events unfold at this critical point in the process.

If a realistic opportunity presents itself, I expect Labour will move to either minimise the negative consequences of Brexit, or to open up the possibility of a second referendum, depending on the circumstances. This assumes that "sensible" Labour MPs don't bottle it and vote against the party whip for May's bad deal.

The beauty of Labour's position is its much-derided vagueness (= flexibility).

 

[JonR]

The article you linked to was off the scale in its rabid hostility.

Given the frankly disgusting nature of this so-called "documentary" (it will forever remain a mystery why Ofcom considered it did not break any rules), you can hardly be surprised at the nature of the response.

Many Labour MPs (including Corbyn) oppose what Israel has done to the Palestinians. That does not make them anti-Semitic.

Many Labour MPs (including Corbyn) oppose what are in fact their own largely fictitious and bigoted notions of what Israel may or may not have done to the Palestinians. That does not make them grounded in reality.

 

[Tony L]

The beauty of Labour's position is its much-derided vagueness (= flexibility).

Obviously I don’t agree. My view is that they should have been fighting what has only ever been a highly dodgy right-wing nationalist/isolationist project tooth and claw right from the off. There is little nuance to be claimed here, Brexit has only ever needed opposition in the loudest, bluntest and most basic sense. Even if that meant losing a few ugly northern seats then it is a price wirth paying for being on the right side of the argument and being seen to have been all along.

PS Can we please keep Israel/Palestine off the thread - it is hard enough to moderate the off topic room as is at present without exploding that ugly can of worms yet again!

 

[gassor]

Disagree with your first assertion, but agree with your second.

Brexit in almost any form seems likely to increase the pressure for another Scots Indyref, and increase the number who will vote for it. Overall, the Scots do not want Brexit.

In addition, as I've pointed out in the past: During the previous indyref one reason for voting 'No' that was trotted out was that leaving the UK then meant being ejected from the EU. Some here now feel particularly aggrived that this swung them to 'No'... only to find the English now dragging them out of the EU against their wish!

There is no public clamour up here at present for Indyref2 as we prepare to leave the EU. An independent Scotland would have to wait its turn in the queue to join which could take 10+ years. Then there are the slight problems of the public deficit and providing a new stable currency - both requirements of entry - to overcome. These could take 10 years at least, meaning we would not be joining the EU for 20+ years (half lifetime up here ). The main reason why the SNP lost the last Indyref is down to its lack of credible economic policy as an independent country.

Sturgeon will announce in the next week or so what her thoughts are so nothing is clear at present. In the past, she has been very cautious about going for another ref that might say No as the whole issue would become dead in the water. The other slight problem is that neither a Tory and Labour govt would give permission to hold it in the first place.

 

[gassor]

The beauty of Labour's position is its much-derided vagueness (= flexibility).

What do we want? Not sure.

When do we want it? Whenever.

 

[wacko]

There is no public clamour up here at present for Indyref2 as we prepare to leave the EU. An independent Scotland would have to wait its turn in the queue to join which could take 10+ years. Then there are the slight problems of the public deficit and providing a new stable currency - both requirements of entry - to overcome. These could take 10 years at least, meaning we would not be joining the EU for 20+ years (half lifetime up here ). The main reason why the SNP lost the last Indyref is down to its lack of credible economic policy as an independent country.

Sturgeon will announce in the next week or so what her thoughts are so nothing is clear at present. In the past, she has been very cautious about going for another ref that might say No as the whole issue would become dead in the water. The other slight problem is that neither a Tory and Labour govt would give permission to hold it in the first place.

The EU would be very sympathetic to Scotland and would have to agree terms in principle before Indyref2 so that people know what they are voting for. Scotland would have to adopt the Euro. It could be a lot less than 20 years.

 

[Marchbanks]

Suppose, for example, May is emboldened by yesterday's splintering of Labour and calls another snap election. If there were unambiguous evidence of a stable lead for Remain, it wouldn't surprise me if Labour offered a second referendum in its manifesto.

As May needs support from either Labour or DUPERG it would surprise me less if - perhaps seeing Lab as less of an electoral threat than they were yesterday - she relaxed her red line on the CU*. While losing the votes of some Brexiteers she’d at least get a deal through with Labour’s help.

*That isn’t how it will be phrased, of course.

 

[matthewr]

Do you really think he’ll switch to demanding another referendum at this late stage? I’ll go buy a hat and eat it if he does! It is blindingly obvious that Corbyn is an ideological Brexiter and will go against the will of his party membership whenever it suits him. He appears happy to do it in the most snide, slimey and duplicitous manner imaginable too by allowing the window of opportunity to time out, just as May is with Brexit itself. Two peas in a pod. He is a remarkably small man.

TBH I am not sure such strident posts help anyone. Indeed the other place one regularly sees that combination of an extreme views and absolute certainty is in the outer fringes of the left and from randoms on twitter. I am not a fan of Corbyn but it's more a question of being underwhelmed, very worried about Brexit and with (longer term) concerns about antisemitism rather than thinking he is the bad faith, duplicitous ogre you make him out to be.

 

[matthewr]

As Jim says, the best indication of the Will O'The Membership is the policy that was agreed at conference, which the leadership are still following. And the policy made clear that if the call for a second referendum was going to come it was going to be at a late stage, once all other possibilities had been exhausted.

Both Labour and the government seem to have a very generous concept of "late stage" that implicitly assumes a very cooperative EU.

 

[Greg]

I assume you've been watching the awful "The Lobby' film - a laughable and discredited joke, focusing on a very junior Embassy staff. I know people who were followed around by the film makers who harassed young Jewish people in an effort to discredit them. I support Israel's right to exist, that doesn't make me a supporter of Israel government policy - you conflate the two, when they are separate issues.
LFI and JLM are different organisations. Where does JLM call for a 'greater Israel'?
You see what you are doing is using antisemitic tropes to discredit Jewish people. They are: a) Jewish people are acting in bad faith, on behalf of Israel, b) the accusations of antisemitism are made up, which BTW are denied by McDonnell and even Maomemtum and most leftwing leaders in the LP, means you think Jews are lying. It's not a good look and one that contravenes LP policy.

It would appear I don't have a right of reply to your slur, despite my reply being reasonable.

 

[Tony L]

TBH I am not sure such strident posts help anyone. Indeed the other place one regularly sees that combination of an extreme views and absolute certainty is in the outer fringes of the left and from randoms on twitter. I am not a fan of Corbyn but it's more a question of being underwhelmed, very worried about Brexit and with (longer term) concerns about antisemitism rather than thinking he is the bad faith, duplicitous ogre you make him out to be.

I do take your point. I very often don’t like the way my posts read in hindsight and the one quoted is a good example. I worded it badly (far too tabloid/popularist!), but I’m sorry, I do very much question Corbyn’s motives. I see him very much as an ideological Brexiter, albeit for very different reasons to the usual Tory/EDL type. He is well known to be in the Tony Benn tradition on the EU and has been on record many times to that effect. Given this to my eyes has been very deliberately evasive to the point of ensuring any opportunity for the party to really oppose Brexit has now long passed. I just can’t believe this is accidental.

There are parallels here with the anti-Semitism issue. I don’t think he is actually a racist, but to my mind the staggeringly low-key slow-reaction to what is clearly a high profile issue speaks volumes. It was inexcusable before this week, but now a highly prominent Jewish MP has cited it as the reason to leave her party I see his position as leader as untenable. There was a more than adequate timeframe to jump on this issue, and for whatever reason he didn’t. Labour need a new leader.

 

[jackbarron]

Do you really think he’ll switch to demanding another referendum at this late stage? I’ll go buy a hat and eat it if he does! It is blindingly obvious that Corbyn is an ideological Brexiter and will go against the will of his party membership whenever it suits him. He appears happy to do it in the most snide, slimey and duplicitous manner imaginable too by allowing the window of opportunity to time out, just as May is with Brexit itself. Two peas in a pod. He is a remarkably small man.

There is a possibility, however Corbyn has been doing everything he can to stop it

The way Corbynistas go on about Jezza following the wishes of the Conference is laughable. A People's Vote, or second referendum, was the last thing he wanted.

It wouldn't surprise me he allowed a Tory No Deal Brexit to take place, rather than support a second referendum or People's Vote.

I could of course be wrong. Certainly hope so.

Apparently 30 more Labour MPs are worried about Corbyn's Brexit stance. They might leave the Party, according to Norman Toryboy Smith.

Jack

 

[NeilR]

I do very much question Corbyn’s motives. I see him very much as an ideological Brexiter, albeit for very different reasons to the usual Tory/EDL type. He is well known to be in the Tony Benn tradition on the EU and has been on record many times to that effect. Given this to my eyes has been very deliberately evasive to the point of ensuring any opportunity for the party to really oppose Brexit has now long passed. I just can’t believe this is accidental.

We also should cast our minds back to the referendum campaign itself where his campaigning was half hearted to say the least! He does bear some responsibility for this mess, IMO. This can only be through being a secret Brexiter or through sheer incompetence, neither of which paints a very complementary picture.