By trying to remove ‘no-deal’, Jeremy Corbyn is the only one acting like a prime minister

Jeremy Corbyn
Support us and go ad-free

By trying to remove the threat of a no-deal Brexit, Jeremy Corbyn is the only party leader acting like a statesman. Theresa May finally approached opposition leaders after parliament rejected her Brexit plan by the biggest margin in history.

But the Labour leader has reiterated that ruling out a no-deal must be the starting point of the talks. In response, Lib Dem leader Vince Cable and many Conservatives accused Corbyn of ‘playing party political games’.

This makes no sense. Because Corbyn wants a general election, and the threat of no-deal increases the chance of that eventually happening. But instead of exploiting that, Corbyn is trying to reach a constructive compromise: Brexit with a permanent customs union to avoid a hard border in Northern Ireland and to give strong single market access.

The Lib Dems are a joke

By contrast, the Lib Dems and the Conservatives are happy to keep no-deal on the table. In fact, May’s flagship tactic seems to be to run down the clock towards no-deal in order to blackmail MPs into supporting her. And on 16 January, Cable had no problem holding talks with May, while no-deal remains on the table. That could be because the ‘cliff edge’ threat also increases the chance of the Lib Dem policy of a second referendum.

Cable then confirmed that his party would shield May from further confidence votes against her:

Since he appears to be determined to play party political games rather than acting on the wishes of his own members and MPs, he will no longer be able to rely on our support for further no confidence motions

Labour hit back:

Read on...

Support us and go ad-free

The Lib Dems propped up the Tories for five years, so it’s no surprise they’re still committed to keeping them in power

Cable has no answers

The Lib Dems have also failed to clarify how their policy of a second referendum could go ahead. In accordance with Electoral Commission processes, a referendum needs around five months for question formulation and campaign time. And before that, parliament would have to agree that another vote is the way forward. Time for officials to prepare for the poll is also needed.

Five months plus time for Westminster to agree would take us over 23 May, the date European elections begin. European parliament Brexit coordinator Guy Verhofstadt has said that extending Article 50 (the process for leaving the EU) beyond then is “unthinkable”.

By contrast, a general election can happen in about six weeks. This is how long it took in 2017. And an election is the normal procedure for bringing about new parliamentary arithmetic. This is the root cause of the Brexit deadlock: there is simply no majority for anything in parliament.

“A stunt”

With May still committed to her ‘red lines’ and the no-deal threat, Corbyn branded the offer of talks “simply a stunt”:

Indeed, May has only asked opposition leaders to get involved at this late stage. And she only phoned the leaders of the two largest unions on 10 January. These are not the actions of a prime minister who wants to build a genuine consensus.

In contrast, Corbyn ‘reached out’ to May in his Labour conference speech in September 2018, outlining the type of soft Brexit he thinks can pass through parliament. Fearing the Conservative hard-Brexit wing and her leadership contenders, May still seems determined to stick to her plan; even though it suffered the greatest parliamentary defeat of all time. That the Conservatives, and now the Lib Dems, are propping up such a calamity exposes the self-serving elite for what it really is. On the other hand, Corbyn is the only one acting in the national interest instead of running down the clock to increase the chance of a general election.

Featured image via Sky News Politics/ Twitter

Support us and go ad-free

Get involved

  • Sign this petition if you have no confidence in Theresa May and want a general election now.

Do your bit for independent journalism

Did you know that less than 1.5% of our readers contribute financially to The Canary? Imagine what we could do if just a few more people joined our movement to achieve a shared vision of a free and fair society where we nurture people and planet.

We need you to help out, if you can.

When you give a monthly amount to fund our work, you are supporting truly independent journalism. We hold power to account and have weathered many attempts to shut us down and silence the counterpoint to the mainstream.

You can count on us for rigorous journalism and fearless opposition to an increasingly fascist government and right wing mainstream media.

In return you get:

  • Advert free reading experience
  • Behind the scenes monthly e-newsletter
  • 20% discount from our shop


The Canary Fund us
  • Show Comments
    1. A good point can be made in voters choosing Brexit originally I suppose even with all the Brexit lies.
      So one would think of different relationships with the EU to be explored in negiotiating this new realtionship over the two years. As Norway is different, Switzerland isn’t in the EU, and so on.
      The Eu said they have always been open to it.
      Yet the details of a status quo split for 2 years amounted to jargon language, and vagueness, and beyond reach of the parliament to discuss the nature of this split
      So one has to think the no deal or Hard Brexit of the extremists in the Tory party plan was always to have a “no deal” from right from the beginning .
      Not only is this a contempt of parliament but I think its a socially criminal act to deliberately fail to perform their duty as parliamentarians so as this extreme group achieved their ultimate goal of a hard Brexit.
      I’d prosecute these people for a dereliction of duty.
      Maybe a theater play without the expense of having legal fees?
      No discussion, no transparancy to explore the meaning of what was voted upon originally.
      It may be some of the Tories may vote to dissolve the house with Labour as a last resort to salvage whatever integrity they have left. Many Tories voted against May’s plan in an astounding vote of rejection so why not consider it a possibility?
      I was mistaken in thinking another “popular vote” is the answer after reading the news, especially after listening to Aaron Bastani of Novara Media as to why a general election has good sense.
      How it may happens no one knows but that doesn’t mean it won’t.

    Leave a Reply

    Join the conversation

    Please read our comment moderation policy here.