Why so much surprise over Corbyn calling for Labour to Abstain?

Daphne, can you explain why libdems abstained on the vote for an end to austerity?

pogs there is no logic in your argument

Assuming that you agree that leaving the EU means leaving the market of 4 principles

That is the Labour Party position.

So leaving the EU can't at the same time mean that we remain in the single market.

BUT - it is recognised by the Labour Party that to crash out as many of the hard Brexiters have suggested will lead to disastrous consequences for jobs and the economy.

So Starmer etc, will negotiate to obtain as much as possible of the single market benefits. BUT it isn't the single market.

I was quite clear when voting Labour that it accepted the referendum vote, but I can't answer for others who clearly either did not read the manifesto, listen to what was being said or simply misunderstood.

From a personal point of view I think it is going to be an utter disaster if we leave the EU, and as each day passes I get more worried and more convinced that it is the worst decision this country has ever made. I just wish that it meant that those who voted remain weren't dragged into the gutter alongside the Leavers.

Message to ana no reference needed.

OK I believe you. Strange how some of your posts are completely different in style though.

ana That's because sometimes I'm feeling chatty and sometimes I post with more seriousness and thought.

Yours of course are always the same because you generally only do one liners

Doesn't it get tiring ww always being snippy on here?

Snippy is always using oneliners. You can't accuse whitewave of that.

That's not what 'snippy' means durhamjen.

No, it isn't.

It was obvious Corbyn wanted out during the campaign, no tv debates, some appearances in halls arranged by momentum but not televised, his little holiday in the middle if it.

dj No, I can't explain, because I don't know. Do you mean when they were in coalition?

Of the current bunch of MPs who have resigned/been sacked, I know what Zeichner said during the recent election, because Cambridge is a neighbouring constituency.

Cambridge is very strongly Remain and relies heavily on the single market. It has been a LibDem/Labour constituency for ages. Labour won it in 2015 and had a tiny majority, so it was an ultra-marginal.

I thought the LibDems would win it back in 2017, but Zeichner increased his majority. Cambridge ended up with a choice between two very good constituency candidates. The previous LD had been good, but so was Zeichner. Both believe passionately in Remain and Zeichner told voters he would do all he could for a "soft Brexit". I believe it was a matter of conscience for him to keep his word to his constituents and the majority on his Twitter feed support him.

This was the same line pushed by Jeff Smith in Manchester Withington, which is also strongly Remain and had been a LibDem seat, although not so marginal as Cambridge.

I had a number of discussions with my daughter about Labour and Remain. It's clear that she (and I suspect many others) voted for and supported Labour, because she thought they would find some way to soften Brexit. My argument always was that a "soft Brexit" can't happen and has ever been defined - I still don't see how it can. My opinion is that Labour has been less than honest about its stance on Brexit.

PS. I've been very disappointed with Starmer. If Labour is playing the long game, it's not very opaque and they aren't being very coherent.

PPS. An anti-Brexit movement doesn't necessarily has to be centrist. The Greens are anti-EU, but to the left of Labour on many issues.

WW

"leaving the EU can't at the same time mean that we remain in the single market. "
----

That is a point I have been saying for yonks but I have been chastised for saying so.

I have never noticed you have agreed with that point until this thread either.

I have been posting on the fact Labour and Keir Starmer in particular, as he is a Brexit Spokesperson , have been all over the place by saying Labour "Will end the free movement of people" but then go on to say they want to stay in the Single Market. I repeat Labour cannot keep saying that , they are being disingenuous.

It won't be missed by many I have repeatedly asked of posters such as yourself the following question but I have never received a reply.

'HOW' can you stay in the Single Market when the UK would 'HAVE TO' comply with the 4 Pillars/Freedoms enshrined in the EU? Even the EFTA / EEA countries have to abide by the Freedom of Movement of goods, capital, services and persons. The EU from The EU Commission, Merkel, Tusk, Juncker all say 'NO CHERRY PICKING' .

Keir Starmer came in for, quite rightly, a lot of comment after his Brexit Speech for not showing an understanding of that point, he faced in two directions and that is not possible.

Even on the day of the Queens Speech I heard Labour MP Jack Dromey spouting we must stay in the Single Market/Customs Union. When challenged how he did the usual , deflected .

Corbyn by not backing Chuka Umuna's Amendment and telling his MP's to Abstain has sent a clear message re his view on the Single Market. Labour must stop the charade of telling the voter Labour could negotiate for the UK to be able to stay in the Single Market and also 'End the free movement of people'.

I would hope the EU/UK negotiations could come up with a deal where we have access to the Single Market but it will only happen if the likes of Tusk, Merkel and Junker put economy before politics and stop the 'No cherry picking' 'Non negotiable' stance they have taken over The Free Movement of People.

Umuna has certainly set the cat among the pigeons for the Labour Party Leadership by calling for 'The UK should remain in the Single Market and the Customs Union' in his Queens Speech Amendment that's for sure.

No, I mean yesterday, daphne.

A Labour amendment calling on the Government to end the public sector pay cap, introduce a higher minimum wage and increase taxes on the wealthy was defeated by 323 votes to 297.

All 12 Libdems abstained on that vote, which is why it was 26 majority.

www.greenparty.org.uk/news/2017/05/02/caroline-lucas-full-brexit-speech/

How does this make the Greens anti-EU?

I've not been disappointed with Starmer.
He is showing that he knows the law.
You can't say that May is wrong by going for a hard Brexit, then criticise Starmer for trying to negotiate. That's what he's doing.

By the way, roses and Ana, snippy means being sharp and abrupt, you know, just like you two always are.

They were frontbenchers. Now they can be backbenchers and have the freedom to defy the government when they feel an important principle is at stake, as Corbyn did.

May has already antagonised the EU with her very combative approach (she appears to see the "very difficult woman" label as a badge of honour). Corbyn is known to be a much more conciliatory person who prefers to try and identify the areas in which the negotiating parties have common ground, and move forward from there. I think his approach would be much more likely to yield positive results for both the UK and the EU.

I think there are many people who felt like Corbyn - not particularly enthusiastic about the EU but nor particulary enamoured with the alternative either.

Of course, it is a difficult position for Corbyn and for Labour, but no more so than for the Conservatives who also have their issues with MPs - and supporters - who don't really care whether we have good relations with the EU or not as long as we have a "hard" Brexit.

POGS Are you the same POGS that used to post a couple of years ago - your style of writing seems to have changed?

Rare to read anything amusing on the politics thread,

Corbyns cabinet -most of whom are newbies - voted with the whip out if loyalty to Corbyn. Nothing to do with clinging to their rapid promotion

durhamj ....... and perhaps, ( snippy) rather like your dear self?
We told you it didn't mean 'one liners' but as you have such a good grasp of the use of English you thought you knew better.

Keir Starmers 6 points that Labour will look for in Tory negotiations otherwise they will not vote for Brexit.

The test is as follows

1. Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU
2. Does it deliver the exact same benefits as we currently have as members of the single market and customs union
3. Does it ensure fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities.
4. Does it defend rights and protect and prevent a race to the bottom
5.Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross border areas
6. Does it deliver for all regions of the UK?

Can't get much shorter than a oneliner.

I liked Barry Gardiner's snippy comment about the EU tantrum on the Queen's speech being unhelpful.

That sounds quite clear to me, whitewave.
I go along with that.
I particularly like 2.
That's a conundrum, certainly.
Can we get the exact same benefits? Not the way May is going, but we might through real negotiation, instead of May's flagwaving.
Red, white and blue Brexit?
France has a red, white and blue flag.

So has Norway, so maybe we are going to adopt the Norwegian model.

2. Does it deliver the exact same benefits as we currently have as members of the single market and customs union

That's have your cake and eat it and everyone can have a unicorn country.

We cannot possibly leave the EU and enjoy exactly the same benefits we have today.